harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodrigo Kumpera <kump...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [arch] The Third Way : C/C++ and Java and lets go forward
Date Mon, 23 May 2005 22:46:09 GMT
Not true. A java-in-java JVM donĀ“t need any C code. Making syscalls is as 
hard as calling a C function (from the assembly point of view), so providing 
a wrapper for ether native functions or system calls is not that big deal. 
But, well, it would be a lot more profitable to leverage APR to do a lof of 
this dirty work. 
But no java-in-java JVM can escape from having a C interface, at least for 

 On 5/23/05, Tor-Einar Jarnbjo <Tor-Einar@jarnbjo.de> wrote: 
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > (for the record, this isn't about "not doing Java" or "not doing
> > JikesRVM", but rather my understanding that we'll need a small C/C++
> > kernel to host the modules, no matter how they are written, and this
> > is a way to get that going...)
> Excuse me if I'm missing something, but wouldn't it be necessary to
> implement parts of the VM or the class library in native code anyway?
> I'm thinking about code to access e.g. resources like I/O devices, sound
> etc.? Or is this discussion C vs Java restricted to the bytecode
> executing part of the VM?
> Tor

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