4 ms·
No. We however had several ideas over the years to cache bytecode together with the JavaScript code. But that never really went anywhere. Caching JIT-code is di
by evilpie 14y ago
No. We however had several ideas over the years to cache bytecode together with the JavaScript code. But that never really went anywhere. Caching JIT-code is difficult, because addresses (like jumps) change unless you malloc at the exact same location or manually fix up everything.
- alcuadrado 14y agoI see. I was thinking in something more bytecode-like, didn't knew that jitcode has direct adressess in it.
- pedroo 14y agoHow much worse peformance-wise would generating PIC be to address this?
- derefr 14y agoIt sounds like you need two separate JITcode phases: first, generate Position-Independent JITcode (and cache that); then for each script that requires it, load it and "link" it.