News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why C++ is not my favourite language by alaricsp on Friday August 28, 2009 @02:33PM (#791965)
I've not seen anything like the dynamic-dispatch optimisations the Self team came up with in the 1990s done in C++, nor problem-domain optimisations expressed as macros as is often done in Lisps, nor the aggressive constant-propagation of closures and their eventual inlining that Factor does.

Perhaps some of them could be applied, but a highly complicated base language with extensive mutation semantics (including pointer aliasing) probably mean they'll be so limited in their applicable scope, and so difficult to implement, that it's not an attractive activity for C++ compiler writers...

Re:Why C++ is not my favourite language by eru on Friday August 28, 2009 @04:50PM (#792266)
Do you know Synthesis OS (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.29.4...). The author made the OS specialize (and thus optimize) system calls during runtime (or something like that, it's been a while since I read the paper). The techniques might me applicable in higher-level languages than the assembler used there.
Re:Why C++ is not my favourite language by alaricsp on Friday August 28, 2009 @08:10PM (#792531)
Yeah! Synthesis is quite excellent. I've been interested in exploring using the FORTH model of easily-accessible-runtime-compiler in that sort of context...
Re:Why C++ is not my favourite language by eru on Saturday August 29, 2009 @02:50AM (#792890)
However it seems dead. Anything new on Synthesis (and related ideas) in the last two decades?
Re:Why C++ is not my favourite language by alaricsp on Saturday August 29, 2009 @04:51AM (#792996)
Other than JIT recompilation in VMs of various kinds (which is only indirectly related), no, not that I know of...