|
|
|
|
|
by binary132
574 days ago
|
|
From what I understood Mike does not want to merge someone else’s implementation of a new ISA but would rather be sponsored and do it himself. Can’t be bothered to source this claim at the moment so feel free to treat it as “came to me in a dream” level authenticity until proven otherwise. Seems reasonable though, I would also be paranoid about merging a sensitive complicated JIT implementation from an unknown contributor. |
|
> Is the sponsor prepared to sponsor the initial review and integration into the LuaJIT default code base by me?
> Is the sponsor prepared to sponsor the inevitable initial bug fixes and the extra effort for continued maintenance that a new architecture entails?
Also, I should have been clearer about the new GC I linked to: I have not seen Mike say anything about it, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least if he rejects it and (wishes to) write his own, because he's had his own plans for many years. It seems impossible to get anything past him without modification. (I think it's a pity to see someone send a PR with a highly informative commit message and he replaces the body with "Thanks to X. #987")
[1] https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/628#issuecomment-716...