J. Elliot B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229240. ACM, ACM, June 1987.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....next function call just re initialize the elds. This would need 97 one extra eld in each frame to keep a forward pointer, but the overhead involved in setting up and removing frames would be reduced. There are many interesting variations over this idea that would be interesting to experiment with [25]. 21.5 Optimizations Since we are making a non interactive system, we can, through a simple analysis of the occurrences of define and set , determine whether any predened function may be changed by the code. Those that are not changed can then be inlined. Preliminary experiments with inlining ....

J. Elliot B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229240. ACM, ACM, June 1987.

....procedure process scan of the language interface. Now, basic scan performs the Cheney breadth first copy, applying the scanning procedure passed to scan individual blocks. garbage collect: Collects all generations. pre scan scavenge: In Smalltalk, scavenges unreachable (not stabilized[4]) frame objects so that their step can be scanned. In general, scavenges objects of unscannable steps. scan: Prepares all steps for scanning and passes a scanning procedure to basic scan. 3.7 Interface routines needed by the collector The implementor must write these procedures, which the ....

J. E. B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229--240, St. Paul, MN, June 1987. ACM. 11

....their general properties. 4.2.1 Languages We used two object based systems. The first, Smalltalk, is an older purely object oriented language [Goldberg and Robson, 1983] which consists of three parts: the virtual machine, implemented in an earlier effort in the Object Systems Laboratory [Moss, 1987; Hudson et al. 1991; Hosking et al. 1992] the basic virtual image of Smalltalk 80 from PARC Place Digitalk, and the additional classes and methods of the benchmark programs. The virtual machine includes the language independent garbage collector toolkit, also developed in the Object Systems ....

.... by the observation that image objects could better be treated as static, instead of as part of the garbage collected heap [Clinger and Hansen, 1997] Another property of this implementation of Smalltalk is that method activation records (frames) are internally treated somewhat like objects [Moss, 1987]. However, frames are not treated as objects for the purposes of trace generation. The second system used, Java, 4 is a contemporary object oriented language that has found much use in Internet based downloadable applications. It consists of a virtual machine, and a set of basic and benchmark ....

J. Eliot B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229-- 240, St. Paul, Minnesota, July 1987. SIGPLAN Notices 22, 7 (July 1987).

....fragmented in several independent objects. The creation of a context object on each invocation is a major efficiency bottleneck of ancient Smalltalk implementations. As the majority of invocation context objects become garbage (not referenced) after method execution, in some later implementations [Eliot 87, Ungar 84b, Samples 86, Patrick 86] invocation contexts are built using the normal stack mechanism. Contexts are promoted to objects when they survive the method execution. The detection can be done by software or hardware, as in the Swamp processor [Lewis 86] where pointers to contexts are ....

J. Eliot and B. Moss. Managing stack frames in smalltalk. In Proceedings of the SIGPLAN 87, St. Paul, Minesota, June 1987.

....to the database as necessary. Recovery involves reconstructing the cache from the safe. To keep the size of the safe manageable, it is periodically cleaned by removing log entries that are no longer necessary for recovery. Elhardt and Bayer require locking and logging at the granularity of a page. Moss et al. 1987] extend the database cache algorithms to allow locking and logging at a finer granularity. The goal of their extension is to increase concurrency and, ultimately, performance. These extensions are certainly possible within our framework. Indeed, Moss et al. 1987] propose an investigation of the ....

....at the granularity of a page. Moss et al. 1987] extend the database cache algorithms to allow locking and logging at a finer granularity. The goal of their extension is to increase concurrency and, ultimately, performance. These extensions are certainly possible within our framework. Indeed, Moss et al. 1987] propose an investigation of the effects of different lock and log granularities on system performance, which we partially address here. Our system is not an exact implementation of the database cache, but we use a similar buffer management protocol and our checkpoints have semantics similar to ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Moss, J. E. B. (1987). Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229--240, St. Paul, Minnesota. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 22, 7 (July 1987).

....their general properties. 4.2.1 Languages We used two object based systems. The first, Smalltalk, is an older purely object oriented language [Goldberg and Robson, 1983] which consists of three parts: the virtual machine, implemented in an earlier effort in the Object Systems Laboratory [Moss, 1987; Hudson et al. 1991; Hosking et al. 1992] the basic virtual image of Smalltalk 80 from PARC Place Digitalk, and the additional classes and methods of the benchmark programs. The virtual machine includes the language independent garbage collector toolkit, also developed in the Object Systems ....

.... by the observation that image objects could better be treated as static, instead of as part of the garbage collected heap [Clinger and Hansen, 1997] Another property of this implementation of Smalltalk is that method activation records (frames) are internally treated somewhat like objects [Moss, 1987]. However, frames are not treated as objects for the purposes of trace generation. The second system used, Java, 4 is a contemporary object oriented language that has found much use in Internet based downloadable applications. It consists of a virtual machine, and a set of basic and benchmark ....

J. Eliot B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229-- 240, St. Paul, Minnesota, July 1987. SIGPLAN Notices 22, 7 (July 1987).

....includes memory referencing instructions that trap when the full empty state of the referenced location is not as expected. For the ALEWIFE implementation of lazy task creation, a stack is represented as a doubly linked list of stack frames in order to minimize copying in the stealing operation [19]. In this scheme, each frame has a link to the previously allocated frame and another link to the next frame to be allocated. Thus push frame and pop frame operations are simply load instructions. An important feature of this scheme is that stack frames are not deallocated when popped. A ....

Moss, J.E.B., "Managing Stack Frames in Smalltalk," Proc. SIGPLAN '87 Symp. on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, June 1987, pp. 229--240.

.... good performance with such an implementation [Deutsch83] but software implementations have been markedly less efficient [Ungar83] Ingalls97] Consequently, much work has been done to implement contexts more efficiently, both in hardware [Lewis86] Samples86] and software [Deutsch84] Caudill86] [Moss87] [Miranda87] The earliest and highest performance software approach is presented in [Deutsch84] which describes the PS virtual machine 1 . The same techniques were evolved to implement a more portable machine, HPS 2 , the virtual machine used in VisualWorks Smalltalk [CINCOM99] The work in ....

J. Eliot B. Moss, "Managing stack frames in Smalltalk", Papers of the Symposium on Interpreters and interpretive techniques , 1987, Page 229, ACM

....indexed access to the #elds of objects, and object allocation, are all supported as primitives. Notable features of our implementation of the Smalltalk virtual machine are its use of direct 32 bit object pointers, an improved scheme for managing Smalltalk stack frames #i.e. activation records# #Moss 1987#, generation scavenging garbage collection #Ungar 1984; Ungar 1987#, and dynamic translation of compiled methods from bytecodes to threadedcode #Bell 1973#. Threaded code signi#cantly improves the performance of the virtual machine by replacing an expensive decode andbranchoverhead for every ....

Moss, J. E. B. 1987. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, St. Paul, Minnesota, pp. 229#240.

No context found.

J. Eliot B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In SIGPLAN '87 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229--240, St. Paul, MN, June 1987.

....Smalltalk system consists of a virtual machine of our own design. It includes a bytecode interpreter for the instructionset defined in [3] and we run a Smalltalk image cloned (converted into our format) from an earlier release of Smalltalk 80. 2 We manage contexts (stack frames) as described in [7]. In particular, a number of frames are preallocated and assembled on a doubly linked list. Ordinary calls traverse the list in one direction and ordinary returns traverse it the other way, with cost similar to a stack. When a block context (similar to a closure) is created, or a frame otherwise ....

J. E. B. Moss. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '86 Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, pages 229--240, St. Paul Minnesota, July 1987. ACM SIGPLAN Not. 22, 7 (July 1987).

....indexed access to the fields of objects, and object allocation, are all supported as primitives. Notable features of our implementation of the Smalltalk virtual machine are its use of direct 32 bit object pointers, an improved scheme for managing Smalltalk stack frames (i.e. activation records) [Moss 1987], generation scavenging garbage collection [Ungar 1984; Ungar 1987] and dynamic translation of compiled methods from bytecodes to threaded code [Bell 1973] Threaded code significantly improves the performance of the virtual machine by replacing an expensive decode andbranch overhead for every ....

Moss, J. E. B. 1987. Managing stack frames in Smalltalk. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, St. Paul, Minnesota, pp. 229--240.

No context found.

Moss, J.E.B. "Managing Stack Frames in Smalltalk". SIGPLAN '87 Symp. on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, in Sigplan Notices 22,7 (July 1987), 229-240.

No context found.

Moss, J.E.B. "Managing Stack Frames in Smalltalk". Sigplan '87 Symp. on Interpreters and Interpretive Techniques, in Sigplan Not. 22,7 (July 1987),229-240.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC