harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From FaeLLe <mrbillcollec...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Against using Java to implement Java (Was: Java)
Date Fri, 13 May 2005 04:46:18 GMT
I expected to get flamed for this.

Nice to see a postive healthy discussion :)

On 5/13/05, Kev Jackson <kevin.jackson@it.fts-vn.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> >Write code of what ? Based on what ?
> >
> >Nothing has been decided ! After all this still a proposal right ? This 
> can
> >be rejected too :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> My point exactly, nothing has been decided, perhaps it's time to make
> some decisions
> 
> >The thing is how much later into the project will the change be decided ?
> >
> >What if the change we make due too Poor Planning (with two capital P's)
> >cause the entire work or majority of it till then to be discarded ?
> >
> >
> >
> Change isn't a bad thing. I think that the proposal is fairly clear,
> but the approach to take is currently unclear, hence all the noise on
> the mailing list (of which I'm especially guilty)
> >>
> 
> 2) create a community-developed modular runtime (VM and class library)
> architecture to allow independent implementations to share runtime
> components, and allow independent innovation in runtime components
> 
> <<
> 
> I read this as build a better VM than HotSpot under the APL, *and* write
> the class libraries. I don't read this as take kaffe or JRVM or any
> other product and slap an Apache sticker and go faster stripes on it.
> The proposal seems to be clear about writing from scratch if it isn't
> then my bad.
> 
> >Apache votes arent done by the developers it is done by the committe (or 
> am
> >i wrong)
> >
> >
> >
> AFAIK wrong, at least on the other Apache projects I've worked on,
> anyone can make a proposal, and developers can vote, but the committers
> have veto status (correct me if I'm wrong on this).
> 
> >Write a crude VM first, from scratch, using other VM's as guidance, but
> >
> >
> >>not incorporating code from other projects to avoid licensing issues.
> >>Yes []
> >>No []
> >>
> >>At least we can see what's happening
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >No ?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Ok, at least it's a start ;)
> 



-- 
www.FaeLLe.com <http://www.FaeLLe.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message