harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Etienne Gagnon <egag...@sablevm.org>
Subject Re: SableVM / Harmony Collaboration
Date Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:36:15 GMT
Hi Archie,

For obvious reasons, I don't want to end-up "copying" Classpath.  As far
as I know, Harmony does not want to have any GPL code in its certified
J2SE implementation.  [To the casual reader:  Please do not start the
"mandatory" thread on copyrightability of interfaces... I know all about
these things and couldn't care less at the moment.]

Now, I have nothing against doing as much as possible in Java; that has
always been how we've done things in SableVM.

Also, I would like to think about the VMI with the view of a "pure"
virtual machine implementor, not that of a binary compiler implementor
or that of a hybrid system implementor.  It would just be more fun for
me.  I already don't like much working on VMI and class libraries; I
might as well try to make it as enjoyable as possible.

Will read the thread you pointed to.



Archie Cobbs wrote:
> In short, the Classpath VM API is lower layer than the IBM VMI,
> so you'll end up implementing a bunch of the same stuff anyway.
> You might as well implement it in Java instead of in the VM, and
> doing it in the same way as Classpath would allow for much more
> flexibility in terms of Java class library and VM combinations
> and would mean many fewer changes to SableVM. Note I'm referring
> only to the Java/VM API, not the Java/native code API, which is
> really an issue "private" to the class library.

Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D.            http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM:                                       http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC:                                       http://www.sablecc.org/

View raw message