Browse thread
[Caml-list] calling native code from bytecode?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@i...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] calling native code from bytecode? |
> Is there any way to compile part of a project in bytecode and another > part with the native compiler and link them? It seems odd that you > can call C from bytecode but not other caml code. The gc and > everything is the same between the asm and bytecode runtimes, no? Are > datastructures in memory (except code, of course) compatible? Yes, they are compatible, except function closures, which contain native code pointers for ocamlopt and byte-code pointers for ocamlc. But that's where the problem is for mixed-mode execution: treating pointers to bytecode and pointers to native-code differently. One solution would be to have two code pointers per closure, one bytecode and one native-code. For a bytecode closure, the native-code pointer would point to the bytecode interpreter. For a native-code closure, the bytecode pointer would point to a special "switch mode" instruction of the virtual machine. But that's far from easy to implement. Another approach is Fabrice Le Fessant's asmdynlink library, which basically is a bytecode interpreter written in Caml and compiled with ocamlopt. This gives native-code programs the ability to execute bytecode, albeit at a fairly large cost in execution speed. > Basically, I've got some numerical code that I'd like to compile to > native code for performance, but I'd like to keep most of the > non-performance stuff in bytecode so I can use the toplevel and > whatnot. I suppose I could do some sort of heinous bytecode -> C -> > native code shim Besides problems with potential callbacks from native-code to bytecode, there are also (non-essential, but intricate) GC issues that would come in the way. > Obviously, the holy grail would be complete intermingling of bytecode > and native code, and the linker just figures it out and does the right > thing. That would rock. But, I'd settle for bytecode -> native calls > only at this point. > Thoughts? Nothing is impossible, but I shudder at the idea of implementing all this. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr