harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [arch] VM Interface
Date Tue, 07 Jun 2005 20:14:34 GMT

On Jun 7, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Archie Cobbs wrote:

> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>>>>>> I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is  
>>>>>> hoped   there will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but  
>>>>>> continue  to  use Suns class library so that differences in  
>>>>>> libraries  don't hurt  their customers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If that is a goal of Harmony then we've just made things a lot   
>>>>> harder.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> So in summary: I just don't get it.
>>>
>> I suppose not - I thought the issue is really simple, and I'm  
>> sorry  it's gotten a bit off track.
>> We started with the idea that in part, we should look at   
>> modularization of a VM platform.  One of the connection points is  
>> the  VM<->Class library interface, and since we have something to  
>> start  with - the GNU Classpath interface - I suggested we start  
>> there, and  see what additional information we can gather from  
>> those that have  done more advanced and complete implementations  
>> (Sun, IBM, BEA, HP,  etc) and with those considerations, produce  
>> an interface that works  for where we are targeting to go.
>> No one is suggesting we standardize on Sun's interface, wait  
>> until  the JCP does something about this, or bundle our (or anyone  
>> else's)  stuff w/ Suns libraries.  (As for the latter, it would be  
>> nice if it  was an option for those that choose to go that  
>> route... Freedom is  good :)
>>
>
> Learning from Sun et.al. and taking the best ideas is all good...
>
> My reaction was to the notion that a goal of Harmony should be to
> be API-compatible with Sun. Reading the first blurb quoted above,
> that seemed to be the suggestion (maybe I misread it). IMHO it's
> inappropriate to spend any (more) time worrying about API  
> compatibility
> right now, when the possibility is so far off.

Agreed.  API compatibility with Sun isn't a goal right now - but  
having a VM/lib interface rich enough to support the semantics they  
(and anyone else w/ a modern, complete implementation) need isn't  
something we should ignore :)

>
> On the other hand, anyone who has any bright ideas for how the  
> class/JVM
> API that Classpath has now might be improved please speak up  
> (preferably
> on the Classpath mailing list, not this one?)

Either one - if here, we can certainly suggest to classpath (and even  
provide some code... I'm dying to contribute to something under the  
GPL ;)

geir

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



Mime
View raw message