Lorito bytcode security vs jittability

[Peter Lobsinger]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Allison Randal <allison at parrot.org> wrote:
> On 3/11/10 4:57 AM, Peter Lobsinger wrote:
>>
>> It would be great if we could somehow get low-level, easily jittable
>> ops and easily validatable ops at the same time. Striving for both, or
>> at least the right balance, is something we should probably be
>> thinking about when designing Lorito.
>
> The idea for Lorito is that there will be two levels of ops: a) the
> low-level ops that are the core of the VM, and b) high-level "virtual" ops
> composed of those low-level ops, at about the same semantic level as our
> current opcodes. The low-level ops will be directly JITed (as in, we provide
> LLVM IR or other representations for each one) while the high-level ops will
> be JITed the same way as subroutines, composing the total block to JIT from
> the small, low-level ops.

So when we say something is "compiled down to Lorito" (eg: ops, pmcs,
etc), we have access to the high-level op versions of these at
runtime?