develooper Front page | perl.perl6.internals | Postings from March 2005

Re: Pugs Q for the Parrot FAQ?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Aaron Sherman
Date:
March 30, 2005 12:50
Subject:
Re: Pugs Q for the Parrot FAQ?
Message ID:
1112215794.7453.19191.camel@pps
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 14:58, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Based on the wheat on IRC this evening, is this question/answer worth adding
> to the Parrot FAQ on parrotcode.org?
> 
> Pugs is going great shakes - why not just toss Parrot and run Perl 6 on Pugs?
> 
> Autrijus Tang, the lead on the Pugs project, notes that an *unoptimised*
> Parrot is already 30% faster than Haskell. Add compiler optimisation and a
> few planned optimisations and Parrot will beat Pugs for speed hands down.
> Autrijus things that Pugs could be made faster with some Haskell compiler
> tricks, but it's harder work and less effective than the Parrot optimisations
> we already know how to do.

Good answer, and other than adding a bit about cross-language usage I'd
stop there (memory issues are important but complex, and you've already
made your point with this brief answer).

The next question is:

Q: OK, so Parrot is fast... Pugs can back-end to Parrot, right?

A: Yes (though at this time, that's in the early stages). Still, the
ultimate goal is for Perl 6 to be self-hosting (that is, written in
itself) in order to improve introspection, debugger capabilities,
compile-time semantic modulation, etc. For this reason, Pugs will
probably be the compiler that first compiles the ultimate Perl 6
compiler, but thereafter Pugs will no longer be the primary reference
implementation. This is documented by the Pugs team at
http://svn.perl.org/perl6/pugs/trunk/docs/01Overview.html

-- 
Aaron Sherman <ajs@ajs.com>
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
"It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback



Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About