[dparoski]

As noted elsewhere in this thread, a stack-based design typically produces more compact bytecode. Compactness was a concern for us because of the size of FB's PHP code base. Also, generally speaking a stack-based design tends to be easier to deal with when working to get a prototype VM up and running quickly.

Many of the advantages of register-based designs (ability to optimize by rewriting the program at the bytecode level, ability to write faster interpreters, ability to map bytecode registers to physical registers, etc.) weren't particularly attractive to us because we knew we were going to build an x64 JIT that did its own analysis and optimization to take advantage of type information observed at run time.

Thus, we drafted a stack-based design for HipHop bytecode. It captured PHP's semantics correctly and happened to fit in fairly well with PHP's evaluation order, so we ran with it and here we are.

[pbiggar]

Makes total sense, thanks!

Would using a register-based bytecode not have been useful for the x64 JIT?

[kmavm]

Check out our HHIR work. It's an SSA-based IR, that gets us most of the advantages of a register representation. But it is at a much lower level than the bytecode.