Hi michael! so you figured out that we've gatewayed this list through gmane :-) [Michael Hudson Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 11:34:46AM +0000]

holger krekel <hpk@trillke.net> writes:

...

Hi,

i was wondering how/if to get rid of compile.c. ASFAIK it is currently needed for bootstrapping purposes.

Wouldn't it be possible to deliver precompiled bytecode for the python compiler package and thus obsolete compile.c? The bytecode isn't platform dependent so this seems sensible to me.

That sounds possible, and you're always going to have issues like this, but as long as you're hosting your work inside of CPython 2.3, I wouldn't worry about it just yet...

right. But i'd like to get a self-contained bootstrap process ASAP.

(Doing this would make bytecode changes, erm, hairy, it seems to me).

maybe, but doing a multi-stage bootstrap should bring back enough flexibility. E.g. i think that something like the following could work: - the precompiled stage1-compiler compiles the stage2-compiler while running on smallish C-based stage1-VM - stage2-compiler (runing on stage1-VM) compiles python stage2-VM - stage2-compiler (running on stage1-VM) recompiles stage2-compiler (probably with different bytecodes) - stage2-vm takes over - new stage2-compiler (running on stage2-vm) is used subsequently One crucial point seems to be that the stage2 python compiler code maps well to the stage1-VM and stage2-VM. does that make sense? holger

holger krekel <hpk@trillke.net> writes:

Hi michael!

so you figured out that we've gatewayed this list through gmane :-)

I saw the message to gmane.announce, I think. [snip]

does that make sense?

Probably :) I should shut up and let you get on with actually doing something... Cheers, M. -- ARTHUR: But which is probably incapable of drinking the coffee. -- The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Episode 6

holger krekel wrote:

[Michael Hudson Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 05:26:16PM +0000]

...

holger krekel <hpk@trillke.net> writes: [snip]

...

does that make sense?

Probably :) I should shut up and let you get on with actually doing something...

your input is highly appreciated as long as you don't start to suggest project names :-)

But I found the name game very funny. Enough for now, of course.

At least for my part, i am very thankful for knowledgable people like you sharing some thoughts on e.g. bootstrapping scenarios.

I found all the discussion very interesting, too, and it kept me thinking of the project all day, although I should wait until the sprint and do my daily work. There was also an awful lot of private emails to answer. Btw. Guido asked about a sprint at Europython, which I found a very good idea. The project is large enough for more than one sprint. (As somebody mentioned, it will be more like a marathon :-) One thing from a message from Rocco Moretti is worth bringing up again: """ P.S. I would advise for some brave soul (more reliable than me) to start summaries of pypy-dev, like has been done recently for python-dev. It would be nice to have a record of all the major design considerations in a location which doesn't require several hours of sorting through fluff. """ Should we try to find somebody who takes this wonderful task of summarizing, or should we collect info in a Wiki instead? all the best - chris