Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[jmk]

After another context-free belly-rumble:

On Tue Oct  7 18:46:49 EDT 2003, boyd@sdgm.net wrote:
> i'm with you, captain ...

perhaps someone should take you up on this:

On Mon Oct  6 14:11:00 EDT 2003, boyd@sdgm.net wrote:
>     > double edged sword.
>
>     If you don't bother giving your opinion as to why, your post is useless
>     noise.  Please either refrain from posting or spend that little more
>     time making a useful post.
>
> like i said above:  doomed if you post to little, doomed if you post too much.
>
> perhaps i should get you to edit my posts for me?

I know how I would edit most of your posts.

Seriously, if you don't have anything useful to say, don't say it.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[boyd]

    Seriously, if you don't have anything useful to say, don't say it.

yeah, that has not crossed my mind.

so when you're all fired, well ...

i'll just unsubscribe.  hell, maybe i'll do it right now.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[okamoto]

> so when you're all fired, well ...

Seriously, what will hapeen if this comes real...

Kenji

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[boyd]

    Seriously, if you don't have anything useful to say, don't say it.

i'm unsubscribed.  have fun ...

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[rob pike, esq.]

> i'm unsubscribed.  have fun ...

well done, jmk!

-rob

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Skip Tavakkolian]

> We're going to do this
> anyway, but it would be nice to get this done for real in a stretch, rather
> than on our vacations like we are doing now, even if we get 6 weeks a year
> unlike you poor Americans with 2.

We get the other 4 weeks in the form of a national entertainment
extravaganza called the "California Recall Elections".

> This has got to be more fun than picking fights with Jim Choate ...

Wounldn't bet on it.

How about "Optimizing Python In a Unique Manner" or "Optimizing Python
Is Useful, Mostly" -- both have the same acronym: OPIUM
And the obvious logo should be a python consuming itself.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Richard C Bilson]

ESP = Execution-time Specialization of Programs (or, Python)

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Wes Kussmaul]

> ESP = Execution-time Specialization of Programs (or, Python)

"Execution" carries some heavy baggage.

"Optimization" is a great word, connotes improvement of life at the push of
a button.

[9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Laura Creighton]

I'll post my problem here.  It's off topic, but not as there-and-hell-and-gone
as a lot of the off topic posts here.

I am trying to get the EU to fund my Python-In-Python Project.  You can read
all about it at http://www.codespeak.net/pypy  We're going to do this
anyway, but it would be nice to get this done for real in a stretch, rather
than on our vacations like we are doing now, even if we get 6 weeks a year
unlike you poor Americans with 2.

But JIT is not new.  Smalltalk did it, and then self did it.  We are way more
flexible, do type inference (only since last week!!! it works!!!)  And we
can redo our high level analysis on execution.  We will (don't yet) refactor
the generated code while interpreting the actual application.  This might
be thought as "just in time program analysis".  Somebody got a sexy word
to use to describe us?  We need to say 'more than just a JIT' but we aren't
so hot with words.

Ideas?  This has got to be more fun than picking fights with Jim Choate ...

Laura

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Nigel Roles]

Yes, also, while we're at it, shouldn't we get XML into rio?

I read about the idea of using XML as a graphics protocol
on Slashdot so it must be important...

http://slashdot.org/articles/03/10/06/2310218.shtml?tid=104&tid=185&tid=189&tid=190

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[matt]

XML everywhere

they won't be satisfied until we're using XML/IP.

<?xml version="1.0" dtd="http://www.icann.com/protocols/xml_ip.dtd">
<packet length="65535">
	<origin ipv4="192.168.1.101" port="6384" gethostbyname="cpu.punx" />
	<destination ipv4="192.168.1.100" port="80" gethostbyname="www.punx" />

</xml>

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[matt]

now that is weird,

that certainly isn't what I thought I posted

I had taken out the length and included a data part with some base64'd data

ah, I think maybe I know. I might have pressed escape and taken it out of raw mode then gone back into it again.

m

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Scott Schwartz]

| This might
| be thought as "just in time program analysis".  Somebody got a sexy word
| to use to describe us?  We need to say 'more than just a JIT' but we aren't
| so hot with words.

How about OOE, "optimization upon execution"?

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Dan Cross]

> How about OOE, "optimization upon execution"?

Err, wouldn't that be ``OUE''?

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Scott Schwartz]

| > How about OOE, "optimization upon execution"?
|
| Err, wouldn't that be ``OUE''?

Me spell good.

I was thinking "on" at first, but in hindsight I like how
it came out.  :)

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Wes Kussmaul]

ORT = Optimization at Run Time


----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Schwartz" <schwartz@bio.cse.psu.edu>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think
about.


> | > How about OOE, "optimization upon execution"?
> |
> | Err, wouldn't that be ``OUE''?
>
> Me spell good.
>
> I was thinking "on" at first, but in hindsight I like how
> it came out.  :)
>
>

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[matt]

Python inside Python

I would call it SOS - Spit or Swallow

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[boyd]

i'm with you, captain ...

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Micah Stetson]

> | > How about OOE, "optimization upon execution"?
> |
> | Err, wouldn't that be ``OUE''?
>
> Me spell good.
>
> I was thinking "on" at first, but in hindsight I like how
> it came out.  :)

I think my script has an oweee.

Micah

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Rob Pike]

JIT is even older than that.  there was an HP implementation of APL in
the
70's that did several layers of optimization on loops. first it
interpreted them,
then if they were busy it did some collapsing, then if it stayed busy
it did some
more, then finally it compiled to bare, highly optimized code.  i
wished i
remembered the details.  maybe it wasn't done at HP but for an HP
machine
at BNR.  not sure any more.

-rob

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Charles Forsyth]

Ronald L Johnston, The Dynamic Incremental Compiler of APL3000.
APL79 Conference Proceedings, pages 82-87, June 1979.

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[rob pike, esq.]

> Ronald L Johnston, The Dynamic Incremental Compiler of APL3000.
> APL79 Conference Proceedings, pages 82-87, June 1979.

maybe.  i think i saw one older than that, or maybe later but derived
from it.  its salient feature was that it did multiple compilations,
devoting more energy to optimization as the usage of the code
went up.

-rob

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[boyd]

pypy is a joke.  and where is my book?

Re: [9fans] some of you guys clearly need something else to think about.

[Wes Kussmaul]

> pypy is a joke.  and where is my book?

You want ~500 pages on your screen or would you rather have paper.

I can send the former right now, the latter in a week.