You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@perl.apache.org by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org> on 2002/05/21 06:14:02 UTC
[Fwd: Re: my __PACKAGE__ $obj now works. does what?]
I was digging at p5p archives and asking about the status of
compile-time method lookup optimization. The 2.0 design doc talk about
this feature as to be added to 5.8, but I understand that this is not
the case. Doug, can you please tell what's the status of this feature?
Thanks a lot!
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: my __PACKAGE__ $obj now works. does what?
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:13:53 +0200
From: andreas.koenig@anima.de (Andreas J. Koenig)
To: Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>
CC: "Andreas J. Koenig" <an...@anima.de>, perl5-porters@perl.org
References: <3C...@stason.org> <m3...@anima.de> <3C...@stason.org>
>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2002 21:14:00 +0800, Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>
said:
> Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2002 20:25:24 +0800, Stas Bekman
<st...@stason.org> said:
>>>>>>
>> > I "guess" that this is the much discussed back in 2000
>> compile-time
>> > method lookup optimization. Though I couldn't find any reference to
>> > this optimization in the pods, other than this single statement.
>> Because it's really just that: it is allowed syntax now, it was a
>> syntax error in 5.6.0.
> that's simple :) thanks
Hold on...
> What was the verdict regarding the patch that was doing the
compile-time
> method lookup optimization. I read the discussion but couldn't figure
> out where it all has ended.
I think this is what you're looking for:
+[ 6267] By: jhi on 2000/06/29 18:16:07
+ Log: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Speeding up method lookups
+ From: Doug MacEachern <do...@covalent.net>
+ Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 13:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
+ Message-ID:
<Pi...@mojo.covalent.net>
+ Branch: cfgperl
+
+ t/op/method2entersub.t
+
! MANIFEST embed.pl lib/ExtUtils/Install.pm lib/File/Spec/Mac.pm
+
! lib/File/Spec/Unix.pm lib/File/Spec/VMS.pm
+
! lib/File/Spec/Win32.pm lib/base.pm op.c perl.h t/op/sprintf.t
+
! xsutils.c
+____________________________________________________________________________
Note that this was a different patch than the "my __PACKAGE__ $foo"
patch, which was 6250.
The needed archaeological skillset in this area goes beyond mine, too
many things were going on in parallel. All I can see is that 6267 was
based on cfgperl which was selectively merged in later (between 6347
and 6369), but it seems it was not integrated. Note the header of
6364:
Change 6364 by gsar@auger on 2000/07/11 18:55:13
skip integrate of change#6267 from cfgperl into mainline (the
method call optimization is flawed without additional hints
from user about immutableness of @ISA and no runtime method
definitions)
--
andreas
--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: [Fwd: Re: my __PACKAGE__ $obj now works. does what?]
Posted by Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org>.
Issac Goldstand wrote:
> Maybe I'm just tired, but I seem to be missing the question here... Can
> I bug either you to explain the issue a tad bit - even off list? Thanks.
>
> Issac
I think they're talking about this (and relevant p5p archive discussions from the same time):
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2000/06/dougpatch.html
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: [Fwd: Re: my __PACKAGE__ $obj now works. does what?]
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
Maybe I'm just tired, but I seem to be missing the question here... Can
I bug either you to explain the issue a tad bit - even off list? Thanks.
Issac
Doug MacEachern wrote:
>On Tue, 21 May 2002, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
>>I was digging at p5p archives and asking about the status of
>>compile-time method lookup optimization. The 2.0 design doc talk about
>>this feature as to be added to 5.8, but I understand that this is not
>>the case. Doug, can you please tell what's the status of this feature?
>>
>
>the archives say it all. a class cannot be subclassed with compile-time
>method lookups happening. i wouldn't declare the idea as dead, it could
>be implemented as a pragma for code that knows it will not be subclassed.
>but given that limitation, time would be much better spent optimizing
>elsewhere.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: [Fwd: Re: my __PACKAGE__ $obj now works. does what?]
Posted by Doug MacEachern <do...@covalent.net>.
On Tue, 21 May 2002, Stas Bekman wrote:
> I was digging at p5p archives and asking about the status of
> compile-time method lookup optimization. The 2.0 design doc talk about
> this feature as to be added to 5.8, but I understand that this is not
> the case. Doug, can you please tell what's the status of this feature?
the archives say it all. a class cannot be subclassed with compile-time
method lookups happening. i wouldn't declare the idea as dead, it could
be implemented as a pragma for code that knows it will not be subclassed.
but given that limitation, time would be much better spent optimizing
elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org