harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robin Garner <Robin.Gar...@anu.edu.au>
Subject Re: half-baked idea? j2me
Date Tue, 01 Nov 2005 04:04:56 GMT
Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:

>AFAIK IKVM, sablevm and jamvm all run on portable devices.
>Developing a j2me jvm is not as easier as it seens, first, the
>footprint and execution performance must be really optimized, so
>expect a LOT of assembly coding.
Back to the language wars again :)  This does not necessarily follow.  
Try googling for the 'squawk' VM - they had a poster at OOPSLA last 
week.  This is a java-in-java virtual machine targetted at embedded 
devices.  The core VM runs in 80KB of memory.  Device drivers are all 
written in Java.

>After that, a jvm that runs in no device is pretty much useless, then
>we would need to test in the many devices we would support. Developing
>for a smartphone platform, like Symbian, BREW or Nokia Series 60
>(Symbian based) would make it easier, but not easy.
>But I cannot say that the idea is bad, as the j2me implementations out
>there are really bad comparing to the j2se offerings. Maybe with a
>FOSS jvm that is pretty solid, many vendors would stop bundling buggy
>software and more convergence of optional capabilities and bugs would
>I'm just not sure that such project would fit the Harmony proposal, as
>the idea is to implement a j2se compatible jvm.
>On 10/31/05, David N. Welton <davidw@dedasys.com> wrote:
>>I'm interested in having a freely available Java system, which seemed as
>>good a reason as any to start lurking on this list lately.
>>I've been mulling over what I've seen in the archives here, what I know
>>of the free java world, free software, communities, marketing, and
>>various and sundry other things and an idea popped into my head.
>>Perhaps, like many others, it's a dumb one, but I thought I'd lob it out
>>there just the same:
>>Why not start out with j2me?
>>*) It'd be breaking new ground - something no one has done before in the
>>'free' world (to my knowledge at least).  That, to me at least, would
>>increase the fun quotient.
>>*) It's small, which would make it easier to get running - or at least
>>easier to make it complete.
>>*) It's simple.  To my knowledge, in order to stay small, most
>>implementations are interpreters (possibly assisted in hardware through
>>things like Jazelle).
>>*) Modulo space saving optimizations, it could then be used as a launch
>>pad for "bigger and better things" should we so desire.
>>*) Perhaps there are some financial incentives for corporations to get
>>involved.  J2SE is "free beer", so the impetus to work on a free version
>>mostly comes from a desire to have an open source Java available,
>>without the practical incentives of a free beer system that other open
>>source projects have had working in their favor.
>>Just a thought...
>>David N. Welton
>>- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
>>Linux, Open Source Consulting
>>- http://www.dedasys.com/

View raw message