Re: [Squeak-VMdev] DING! End of Round One

[Dan I. <Da...@Sq...>]

> > CompiledMethods
>> A major question to decide is whether to split up bytecodes and literals (and source pointer) as in Tim's NewCompiledMethod work. This adds a little space overhead, but it certainly makes things simpler.  I'm going to assume that we go with Tim's 2-object format, and throw in a "serendipity" field for fun this summer.
>IIRC the difference is:-
>header
>bytecodes
>literals
>other ivars
>
>or
>header
>bytecodes
>other ivars
>indexed literals
>
>The difference is that to allow adding ivars in subclasses the second
>option means the VM has to check the number of fixed fields so it can
>find the literals correctly. So it's an extra object or an extra size
>check on every send (well one could cache it in some limited
>implementations but you lose subclassability). I'd go for the extra
>object, personally.

Not to choose sides yet, but I figured this offset would go in the method cache, where it's hardly significant added to the cost of setting up the base reg anyway.  And I don't wee why "you lose subclassability".

	- D