Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 25766 invoked from network); 11 May 2005 04:40:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 May 2005 04:40:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 53642 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2005 04:44:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 53394 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2005 04:44:16 -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 53375 invoked by uid 99); 11 May 2005 04:44:15 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of ken.shao@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.203 as permitted sender) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.203) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2005 21:44:15 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so19157wri for ; Tue, 10 May 2005 21:40:36 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=D9EMBcXDxw2CdJu6YJbCcC/cYr0HvLbMcHCo0KP13+ojh9zxd0TYGcvOGQqCkL6EtUzXSZn04fV7oR7x0jPTlLXNPEYhPkBtS8kO/0VBLGONwEcS/qR7Ew3GI1lz1pUKxfQ3kjZAfMxswOIE4JAH8044pctp+Hwhu1LdY3L4QIk= Received: by 10.54.6.50 with SMTP id 50mr44058wrf; Tue, 10 May 2005 21:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.103.17 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2005 21:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9ca4964e05051021407e95e381@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:40:36 +0800 From: Ken Shao Reply-To: Ken Shao To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Java In-Reply-To: <42818685.2000705@lozano.eti.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_505_30726539.1115786436765" References: <4281779C.8090600@anu.edu.au> <42817DCB.7090004@modsoft.com.br> <42818685.2000705@lozano.eti.br> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_505_30726539.1115786436765 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline I can't agree write JVM in Java. It's crazy. We should make it more powerful, at least we can against .Net. On 5/11/05, Fernando Lozano wrote:=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > See how today we have many high-quality network servers, database > drivers, IDEs, compilers, interpreters and other kinds of system-level > software written in Java. If Java has proven to be more productive for > these software, why not for the VM itself? There's no reason we should > still be dealing with zero-bytes at the end of strings and size of > buffers at every string copy. >=20 > []s, Fernando Lozano >=20 > sergio escreveu: >=20 > > I agree. > > > > Steve Blackburn escreveu: > > > >> I would like advocate the use of Java in implementing the VM (*). > >> This may seem a low-level issue, but I'm raising it now because it > >> will have significant implications for the VM core and the overall > >> approach this project takes. > >> > >> Why? a) Software engineering benefits. b) Performance. c) "Eating > >> your own dog food" is good for you. > > >=20 > ------=_Part_505_30726539.1115786436765--