CWS paper

[John H. Reppy]

In message <14891.53456.640808.157582@eponym.epr.com>, "Stephen Weeks" writes:
>
> > Also, the "call-based" analysis that you describe is essentially the same
> > one that we use to cluster functions in the frame phase.
> 
> Makes sense.  I'd be interested to hear why you don't just CPS the whole
> program.  We've found no disadvantages to having a (first-order, stack based)
> CPS IL.  But that can certainly wait for another day.

I have three reasons for trying a direct style approach:
  1) the IR more closely resembles the source, which makes many things easier.
  2) direct-style is a bit more compact.
  3) it is something different from what I've worked with before.

> 
> Another interesting difference is the fact the MLton does a lot of optimization
> after contification.  Maybe Moby doesn't do so because you haven't gotten around
> to it yet.  But having more intraprocedural information helps optimization a
> lot.

Lal and I have been talking about developing optimizations for the
post-frame-phase representation.  RIght now, Moby's compiler does only
a couple of basic optimizations, so we have a lot of work to do.

	- John