harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From tetsuo <ronald.tet...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Java
Date Wed, 11 May 2005 21:20:44 GMT
I think this applies to compilers, not virtual machines... I've never
heard of a Perl interpreter written in Perl, the same to Python and

Well, we could just compile Java to native code, but it stills seems
weird to me, because of its highly dynamic characteristics (natively
compiled java *interprets* dynamic loaded classes, doesn't it?).

And about Ada and Ocaml (?)... how many programmers actually know how
to program well in those languages? C/C++ has a lot larger developer
base, since a large part (most?) of open source softwares still use it
(ok, 'larger developer base' is not an argument... if it was, we would
code the JVM in VB :P)

On 5/11/05, Mark Brooks <jmb_personal@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Oh, This will not a issue. Just like the C compiler is writen using C
> >language.
> Correct.  It is usually the case that a language tool is written in it's own
> language.  I.e., early versions run on the legacy version, then it becomes
> self-hosting.
> GNU libc is written in C
> SBCL is written in Common Lisp
> etc.
> The problem with using either C or C++ is that you will introduce a host of
> development horrors that Java was designed to address in the firsts place
> when developing large, complex projects.
> If you are determined to use another language to implement the lowest
> levels, I would suggest Ada or Ocaml over C or C++ just to avoid certain
> reliability and maintainability issues from cropping up.  Why stack the deck
> against ourselves?  Of course, there aren't a whole lot of Ada and Ocaml
> hackers around, whereas there is a large base of Java programmers to be
> harnessed.
> Mark
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

View raw message