Re: neko_check_stack failure

Hi,

Thanks for the suggestion, but I would like to avoid the overhead of 
storing everything in an array, if possible. In fact, I would like to 
not have to manage this at all. I am still thinking this check is being 
more conservative than it needs to be, although I will be trying the 
block idea.

-Justin

jmerrill <at> mmm.com wrote:
>
> Knowing nothing at all about what you're doing, I'm wondering -- could 
> you make an array (or other data structure) that holds all the values? 
>  I would think that if you were to replace a not-needed value in an 
> array with something else -- e.g. 0 -- then the value that had been in 
> that slot would be eligible for GC right at that point (unless it was 
> referenced elsewhere of course).
>
> Could that solve your problem?
>
> J. Merrill
>
>
>
> From: 	Justin Collins <justin <at> presidentbeef.com>
> To: 	Neko intermediate language mailing list <neko <at> lists.motion-twin.com>
> Date: 	03/03/2010 06:35 AM
> Subject: 	Re: [Neko] neko_check_stack failure
> Sent by: 	<neko-bounces <at> lists.motion-twin.com>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Nicolas Cannasse wrote:
> > Justin Collins a écrit :
> >  > Okay, granted. However, what about 124 locals at the top-level? That
> >> seems to fail, as well.
> >> As I understand it, local variables are only copied into functions if
> >> they are accessed from those functions. This particular test seems to
> >> assume all local variables may be copied, whether they actually will
> >> or not. Is this correct?
> >
> > Yes, it will fail as well.
> >
> >> My problem is that I generate a lot of short-lived, temporary
> >> variables. They are not going to be accessed from inside other
> >> functions (so there is no danger of having to copy 100+ variables to
> >> the function stack). I don't want them to be globals, because I want
> >> them garbage collected as soon as possible. What are my options?
> >
> > Use {} blocks to separate the stacks :
> >
> > {
> >  var v1,v2....v50;
> >  ...
> > }
> > {
> >   var v51,v52....v100;
> >   ...
> > }
> >
> > This will ensure that your current stack never reach 128.
> >
> > Best,
> > Nicolas
> >
>
> Aha, thank you.
>
> It will take some thinking for me to figure how to use this...and
> playing around with how it interacts with functions and other control
> structures.
>
> -Justin
>
> -- 
> Neko : One VM to run them all
> (http://nekovm.org <http://nekovm.org/>)
>
>
>

--

-- 
Neko : One VM to run them all
(http://nekovm.org)