search for: putstat

...you give an > example snippet of Java code that would need this and what you are > proposing? With a concrete example that shows how the lazy class > loading stuff works we can talk about different possibilities, > > Field operations in Java (getfield, putfield, getstatic, putstatic) do _not_ need what I'm proposing. What I'm proposing is just performance related (just like method patching in callbacks is an optimization in order to not call the callback everytime). Here's a simple example: consider class One: public class One { double a; } and class Two: pu...

On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Field operations in Java (getfield, putfield, getstatic, putstatic) do > _not_ need what I'm proposing. What I'm proposing is just performance > related (just like method patching in callbacks is an optimization in > order to not call the callback everytime). > > Here's a simple example: consider class One: > > public class One {...

On Nov 5, 2007, at 8:27 PM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > I would like to implement an equivalent mechanism of function > callbacks > in the JIT, but for fields. Typically in Java, when you compile a > method, there may be some instructions (getfield, putfield) that > depend > on a type which is not yet resolved. > > I think the best way to do this in LLVM is to add an

Hi everyone, I would like to implement an equivalent mechanism of function callbacks in the JIT, but for fields. Typically in Java, when you compile a method, there may be some instructions (getfield, putfield) that depend on a type which is not yet resolved. I think the best way to do this in LLVM is to add an intrinsic. The intrinsic would be only valid if we jit, and would be lowered only in