Look in the Object PMC's generated C code. See all of the calls to Parrot_oo_find_vtable_override()? Isn't that ridiculous? Some ~6% of all of the time spent running Rakudo, if not more, goes to checking if an object's class has a VTABLE override written in PIR. Most don't. Very few do. Yet these get checked on *every* invocation of each of those VTABLE entries. We can fix this: * create a dummy VTABLE, where each entry automatically, irrevocably delegates to an overridden PIR VTABLE * add code to the NameSpace PMC (or wherever's most appropriate) to duplicate the current class VTABLE and swap in the appropriate override pointer when something adds a VTABLE override * only duplicate that VTABLE once * make sure to free that duplicate VTABLE when appropriate, lest we leak memory at the end of the program We may run a small risk of not being able to add overrides when we've already instantiated objects of the given class, but I think that's a low risk (and we can test for that anyway). We already forbid modifications to the class if we've instantiated objects. This is a fairly simple task which will have positive performance implications for not too much work. Takers welcome. Tasks: * Write a small program (Perl 5 is fine, NQP-rx may be better) which parses src/vtable.tbl * generate a dummy VTABLE * each VTABLE entry should only fetch a PIR sub override and invoke it with the given arguments * see lib/Parrot/Pmc2c/PMC/Object.pm around line 68 * store this dummy VTABLE somewhere where the interpreter can get to it * Add code to the NameSpace PMC to detect adding a vtable override * when this happens, clone the current VTABLE (unless it's already been cloned once) * swap in the appropriate pointer from the dummy VTABLE * store the new VTABLE where instances of the class can use it * (hands wave here; probably Class needs to install it for Object) * add code to Class (or whatever stores the cloned version) to delete the cloned VTABLE * Remove the special cases from lib/Parrot/Pmc2c/PMC/Object.pm That's it!