harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Lydick" <dlyd...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Date Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT

> [Original Message]
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org>
> To: <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> Date: 5/19/05 4:29:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM
> Renaud BECHADE wrote:
> >>>That being said...doing so in a portable and platform independent way
> >>>actually HARDER in Java than in C (and by C I mean 
> >>>C/C++/Objective-C...whatever).  Read the Sable paper...  you'll see
> >>>I mean :-)
> > 
> > 
> This is why I would like Harmony to have two VMs, one written in java
> and one written in C-or-friends: this would give us
>  1) the goal of making things modular enough to allow to swap things
> around and allow parallel development
>  2) create some internal (and friendly!) competition on speed and
> compliance :-)
>  3) attract two different pools of talents
>  4) allow compensation (easier to experiment in java than in C, harder
> to port java than C)
> Thoughts?
> -- 
> Stefano.

I think we should consider also another
option that writing the JVM(s) in C and
writing the class libraries in Java might
be a nice compromise on portability.  Use
the system construction strength of 'C'
and the JVM contect of Java for those
two respective components.

As I have seen everyone's comments on
development language(s), I think we should
continue to discuss it, but ultimately
we need to use the development language(s)
that make sense once some firm architectural
design decisions have come together.  At that
point, we will have considered the ups and
downs of languages and can have an intelligent
place to decide, but we probably should
decide what the scope(s) of action is(are)
first, lest we get the proverbial [language]
cart before the horse.

Dan Lydick

View raw message