pedronis at codespeak.net pedronis at codespeak.net
Tue May 30 18:58:22 CEST 2006

Author: pedronis
Date: Tue May 30 18:58:21 2006
New Revision: 27934

Modified:
Log:
insert XXX as needed

==============================================================================
+++ pypy/extradoc/talk/dls2006/paper.tex	Tue May 30 18:58:21 2006
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
such area.  Building implementations of general programming languages,
in particular highly dynamic ones, using a classic direct coding
approach, is typically a long-winded effort and produces a result that
-is quite [quite could be removed here?] tailored to a specific
+is quite [XXX quite could be removed here?] tailored to a specific
across the code in a pervasive and invasive way.

@@ -211,10 +211,10 @@

We have implemented other transformations as well, e.g. performing
various optimizations, or turning the whole code into a
-continuation-passing style (CPS) [I'm not sure our transformation
+continuation-passing style (CPS) [XXX I'm not sure our transformation
can be classified as classical CPS, although there are known similar techniques but the terminology is quite confused] that allows us to use coroutines
without giving up the ability to generate fully ANSI C code.  (This will
-be the subject of another paper.)  [mention exception transformer too]
+be the subject of another paper.)  [XXX mention exception transformer too]

Finally, currently under development is a variant of the very first
transformation step, for use when targeting higher-level,
@@ -296,7 +296,7 @@
written in plain Python, and it manipulates "objects" that are still at
a lower level: pointer and address objects.  Even with the restriction
of having to use pointer-like and address-like objects, Python remains
-more expressive than, say, C to write a GC.  [see also Jikes]
+more expressive than, say, C to write a GC.  [XXX see also Jikes]

In the sequel, we will call \textit{system code} functions written in
Python that are meant to be analysed by the front-end.  For the