harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Weldon Washburn <weldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Developing Harmony
Date Thu, 19 May 2005 12:01:33 GMT
On 5/19/05, Ahmed Saad <myanywhere@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Then, if the VM is written in Java it will be compiled to native code
> using,
> >for example, gcj?
> >or it will be compiled to byte code and will be interpreted by itself?

One could interpret the VM code but it would be too slow for many.  A
better choice is to run the bytecode through a JIT or ahead of time
compiler then execute the machine code.  This binary image could be
created at development time then distributed thus saving the end-user
time and confusion.

Yes, it is confusing.   I am convinced that in the long term the JVM
and the underlying OS will merge and that 90+ percent of the
combination will be written in a type-safe language (either Java or
C#).

In the short term, I believe we should develop Harmony in C/C++ with a
migration path to a type-safe language (either ECMA CLI based or
Java.)


> >I'm a little bit confused about this topic
> 
> same goes here
> 
> On 5/18/05, Juan Leyva Delgado <juan-leyva@educa.madrid.org> wrote:
> >
> > Then, if the VM is written in Java it will be compiled to native code
> > using,
> > for example, gcj?
> > or it will be compiled to byte code and will be interpreted by itself?
> >
> > I'm a little bit confused about this topic
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <stefano@apache.org>
> > To: <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 4:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Developing Harmony
> >
> >
> > > Ozgur Akan wrote:
> > >> JVM in Java will be the slower then Sun`s JVM. C or C++ is a better
> > >> choice.
> > >
> > > You have to undertand that "written in Java" does *NOT* equate
> > necessarely
> > > as "will be run as interpreted bytecode".
> > >
> > > --
> > > Stefano.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
>

Mime
View raw message