Re: Note on BC and type assertions

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > 
 > > > There may be other assertion types we need to handle as well, a pass
 > > > through the verifier looking for them is warranted.
 > >
 > >That's why I wanted to generate code for the assertions.  Then you can
 > >assert anything you want.
 > >  
 > Using a table of bytecodes with up to 2 utf8 operands we could assert 
 > pretty much anything we wanted.

I don't quite understand your point here.

 > The number of conditions that we actually need to assert should be
 > relatively small, anyhow - I think that giving the runtime more
 > flexibility in how/when it wants to process the assertions is
 > better than allowing the compiler to emit anything it wants, but
 > losing control over when the assertions get run, how the operands
 > are loaded/linked, etc.

Hmm.  Well, the assetions we ganerate are all to be checked at
verification time.

Andrew.