From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 17:41:06 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80DA6480; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freebsd.czest.pl (freebsd.czest.pl [212.87.224.105]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E42D136AF; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:41:05 +0000 (UTC) Received-SPF: pass (freebsd.czest.pl: domain of wkoszek@freebsd.czest.pl designates 212.87.224.105 as permitted sender) receiver=freebsd.czest.pl; client-ip=212.87.224.105; helo=freebsd.czest.pl; envelope-from=wkoszek@freebsd.czest.pl; x-software=spfmilter 0.97 http://www.acme.com/software/spfmilter/ with libspf-unknown; Received: from freebsd.czest.pl (freebsd.czest.pl [212.87.224.105]) by freebsd.czest.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7PHYm1J002640; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:34:48 GMT (envelope-from wkoszek@freebsd.czest.pl) Received: (from wkoszek@localhost) by freebsd.czest.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id s7PHYmPu002639; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:34:48 GMT (envelope-from wkoszek) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:34:48 +0000 From: "Wojciech A. Koszek" To: Jordan Hubbard Subject: Re: Lua in the bootloader Message-ID: <20140825173448.GC59838@FreeBSD.org> References: <3D62F4F4-ECCF-4622-BB57-D028160F3451@freebsd.org> <157901cfbe83$6cbf18d0$463d4a70$@FreeBSD.org> <16e101cfbfee$42b3b930$c81b2b90$@FreeBSD.org> <5FE57E4E-A627-4ABA-AB73-F0D60A3602D5@ixsystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5FE57E4E-A627-4ABA-AB73-F0D60A3602D5@ixsystems.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on freebsd.czest.pl X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (freebsd.czest.pl [212.87.224.105]); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:34:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "" , "" , Pedro Giffuni , Pedro Arthur X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:41:06 -0000 On nie, sie 24, 2014 at 04:43:24 -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > limitations that I battle in Forth are significant enough > > that I'd like to see if Lua can break said chains (such as > > "dictionary full" errors causing BTX halt -- induced simply > > by adding "too many functions" in Forth). > > I'm not one to stand in the way of progress either, but just to make sure > we are not foolishly conflating "language" with "environment" here: You > do all realize that ficl can have any sized dictionary you want, right? > Presumably, it's kept small due to the limitations of the boot loader > environment, and Lua is not going to magically transcend those > limitations. Writing lots of boot code in Lua will require memory, > perhaps even MORE memory since, say what you like about Forth, it's hard > to get more concise or compact than a Forth dictionary of compiled CFA's. > That's why we picked it for the role in the first place. > > So anyway, first try expanding the size of the dictionary. If that can't > be done, now you know your "ceiling" for Lua. Can you stay below it, not > just now but longer term? Those are the questions you need to answer. It would be good to try to do something more sophisticated in Lua and see what the top memory limit is, before we do any serious moves in the loader land. -- Wojciech A. Koszek wkoszek@FreeBSD.czest.pl http://FreeBSD.czest.pl/~wkoszek/