Changes between Version 10 and Version 11 of LoritoRoadmap

06/02/10 05:54:16 (12 years ago)

split design issues into primary and secondary based on when they'll need to be settled


  • LoritoRoadmap

    v10 v11  
    1111=== Lorito Design === 
    12  * Define Lorito ops and semantics (ffi, arg format, binary format, registers, ops, syscalls, text format, etc). 
    13    * Discuss the eventual PBC format and how to allow Lorito-based dynops and PIR ops while avoiding excessive bytecode bloat. 
    14    * If it's agreed that PBC should not store Lorito ops directly, a separate Lorito format should be discussed. 
    15    * Decide whether Lorito bytecode is something we expect to distribute or if it will exist only as a local caching optimization. 
     12 * Define Lorito ops and semantics. 
     13   * Primary issues (should be decided before serious prototyping can begin): 
     14     * how to deal with native types and call C-level functions (ffi) 
     15     * arg format (fixed three-arg format, variable, other) 
     16     * classes of ops 
     17     * security model 
     18     * interaction with PMCs 
     19     * registers (will PMCs have distinct registers or be represented simply as pointers) 
     20   * Secondary issues (can be decided as implementations progress): 
     21     * binary format (i.e. will PBC eventually contain Lorito) 
     22     * textual format 
     23     * composition of PIR ops from Lorito ops 
     24     * how will bytecode be used (i.e. local caching optimization, distributed directly, only present as an intermediate step during compilation) 
     25     * minimizing bytecode bloat (if PBC will eventually become Lorito-based) 
    1626 * Implement some PMCs, ops and library bindings in Lorito to demonstrate that Lorito is sufficiently powerful.   
    1727   * Because Lorito is not intended to be written directly, this stage may involve some annoyance on the part of the implementors.