4 ms·
Lower level, so more control for advanced programs performance-wise.
by Jackim 13y ago
Lower level, so more control for advanced programs performance-wise.
- meddlepal 13y agoIs this aiming to be a semi-replacement for C then? I guess I'm a bit confused as to where it fits in ... Lua is already tiny and performant. We're considering it for some embedded projects soon as a extensibility hook.
- chipsy 13y agoIt's aimed at people who would like to design a very performant DSL. Roughly speaking, your Lua code is the compiler, your Terra code is the runtime. Because the Lua code can metaprogram the Terra code, it's possible to perform dynamic tuning of Terra even while the program is running.
- snaky 13y agoAnd what it may give us at lower level, comparing to LuaJIT + ffi + ljsyscall?
- rossjudson 13y agoCode generators can, for some problems, write code that's faster than hand-written code simply because the sheer complexity of the result is pretty much impossible to handle "in yer brain". This kind of highly problem-specific optimal code-building is out of scope for any kind of JIT, including luaJIT. Have a look at Dan Amelang's jitblt: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2008002_jitblt.pdf http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2008002_jitblt.pdf