Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Solid-State Register Allocator

mattkeeter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–12 of 12 posts

Re: The Solid-State Register Allocator

#11

Post by rrss »

mikemike wrote: post #6

Uh? This *is* the LuaJIT register allocator. Period. Code published 2009. Description published here: https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2009-11/msg00089.html (ignore the TLS cert error). Coming up with a silly markting name, writing a naive implementation and then claiming it's their invention is impertinent. Especially since they mention LuaJIT itself in the text ...

This is such an amazingly uncharitable response.

> I cannot possibly know all of the literature

Maybe this applies to other people too?

Re: The Solid-State Register Allocator

#12

Post by mikemike »

mkeeter wrote: post #9
mikemike wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may want to clarify that in the GitHub repo, too. See my issue there. If you want to go the didactic route, then consider documenting the improvements over the naive implementation: register hinting, register priorities (PHI), two-headed register picking, fixed register picking, optimized register picking for 2-operand instructions (x86/x64), register pair picking, ABI calling-conventions, weak allocations, cost…

Done, I've added the same disclaimer to the Github repo. Given that your Github issue [1] was originally titled "Take Down Notice", I'm now hesitant to read any LuaJIT code. If I read lj_asm.c and learn from it, will you try to take down any register allocation code that I write in the future? [1] https://github.com/mkeeter/ssra/issues/1

I had already changed the title after your reply. The objection is about the naming, which implies an invention claim without further explanation. It's not about the code.
Post reply on HN