[bitc-dev] Vectors and mutability and bears (oh my)

[Ben Kloosterman]

Ah I see my mistake , your just using the regions in the compiler not at run
time but knowing an object or static root is immutable is also very useful
to a GC or run time clone / threading routine. It is probably worth using a
bit in the type field for this for runtime objects ( provided your ok with
mutable xyz and immutable  xyz being different types or masking it for type
comparisons) . Though for a GC immutable is immutable and all its
descendents.

Ben


 >-----Original Message-----
 >From: William Leslie [mailto:william.leslie.ttg at gmail.com]
 >Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 9:02 AM
 >To: bklooste at gmail.com; Discussions about the BitC language
 >Subject: Re: [bitc-dev] Vectors and mutability and bears (oh my)
 >
 >On 5 November 2010 11:19, Ben Kloosterman <bklooste at gmail.com> wrote:
 >> Aren’t regions good for  heap but problematic for static data ( and
 >maybe
 >> stack) ? tagging all  static data would be expensive ( though static
 >> immutable data is often const or readonly so maybe there is some way)
 >
 >Your region system can capture as much or as little information as you
 >want it to. The region system for the compiler I'm working on at the
 >moment has little interest in distinguishing different indexes of the
 >same region with array type, for example. When it does, you can
 >annotate the region of interest as needed, I use this for global,
 >static lists of functions, for example.
 >
 >As far as dependent types go, it would be nice to specify *which*
 >dependent types imply region types.
 >
 >--
 >William Leslie
 >No virus found in this incoming message.
 >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 >Version: 9.0.864 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3230 - Release Date: 11/03/10
 >16:36:00