HolyJit: A New Hope
blog.mozilla.org
HolyJit: A New Hope
1–10 of 219 posts
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#2[deleted]
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#3Is this basically the same transition as V8 did with crankshaft to ignition+turbofan?
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#4First thought was: "Is this another Terry Davis language/framework?"[1]
No, no it is not.
I would suggest changing the name from HolyJit to anything else.
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#5Can we just drop the JS VM and embed some nicer VM (JVM, DartVM) instead?
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#6I'm not sure as to what is fundamentally different about this JIT-compiler (except for the awesome name of course)
Is it basically just a Rust rewrite which also tries to reduce the complexity of their current just-in-time compiler?
Edit: By calling it "just" a Rust rewrite, I'm not implying that's a simple undertaking, even moreso considering the complexity of modern JS engines.
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#7Is this basically the same transition as V8 did with crankshaft to ignition+turbofan?
I think that was the exact opposite - they generated an interpreter from their JIT. This generates a JIT from their interpreter, like PyPy and Truffle do.
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#8I'm not sure as to what is fundamentally different about this JIT-compiler (except for the awesome name of course) Is it basically just a Rust rewrite which also tries to reduce the complexity of their current just-in-time compiler? Edit: By calling it "just" a Rust rewrite, I'm not implying that's a simple undertaking, even moreso considering the complexity of modern JS engines.
Name reminds me of TempleOs's HolyC language...
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#9I'm not sure as to what is fundamentally different about this JIT-compiler (except for the awesome name of course) Is it basically just a Rust rewrite which also tries to reduce the complexity of their current just-in-time compiler? Edit: By calling it "just" a Rust rewrite, I'm not implying that's a simple undertaking, even moreso considering the complexity of modern JS engines.
I believe the fundamental difference is that instead of hand-writing snippets of assembly which their JIT can append, they are having the Rust compiler generate the assembly snippets from Rust code. This lets them be much more confident that they wrote the snippets correctly, and lets them spend much less time writing the snippets so they can focus on optimizations.
Re: HolyJit: A New Hope
#10First thought was: "Is this another Terry Davis language/framework?"[1] No, no it is not. I would suggest changing the name from HolyJit to anything else. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TempleOS
I don't know, I'm a fan of the name to be honest, I wouldn't change it just because of the possibility of accidental association.