Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 94021 invoked from network); 13 May 2005 07:58:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 May 2005 07:58:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 47461 invoked by uid 500); 13 May 2005 08:02:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47391 invoked by uid 500); 13 May 2005 08:02:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47340 invoked by uid 99); 13 May 2005 08:02:17 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: 217.155.92.109 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ben@algroup.co.uk) Received: from mail.links.org (HELO mail.links.org) (217.155.92.109) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 May 2005 01:02:16 -0700 Received: from [193.133.15.218] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.links.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A3933C3D for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 08:57:58 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <42845E09.7010507@algroup.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 08:58:01 +0100 From: Ben Laurie User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Against using Java to implement Java (Was: Java) References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.6.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Mark Brooks wrote: >> I hope you use C to write the VM for Harmony. > > > The chief objection I have to using C to write the VM is that it > introduces a host of common errors and delays associated with using C or > C++ for large products. C is an excellent language for its purposes, > but this isn't 1972. Java was created to resolve a number of problems > that arose from the ever-growing design of C++, which I swear is rapidly > becoming the new PL/1. We could use a restricted subset of C++ I guess, > but a lot of "gee-whiz" features would have to be left out to assure > cross-platform compatibility. So why not use Java? One of the reasons why not, from my POV, is because it runs so badly on most platforms. If you happen to use Windows, Solaris or Linux(? I don't, so I don't know) you may be happy developing in Java. Anywhere else, its a PITA. I've tried to sell C++ in the ASF many times. Even back when it wasn't quite so bloated as it is now it wasn't a popular idea. Far fewer people can write C++ than C, and hardly any of those can write _good_ C++. So, I think we'll end up back at C. As I've said before, I'd like to see a framework that _allows_ most of the VM to be run in Java (or Python, or Perl, or Erlang, or whatever-floats-your-boat), but doesn't require it. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff