harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathan Beyer" <nbe...@kc.rr.com>
Subject RE: [drlvm] Doing the minimum to support Java 5 classfiles
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2006 21:00:37 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Hindess [mailto:mark.hindess@googlemail.com]
> 
> My feeling at the moment is that although drlvm and classlib are working
> together[0], it is evident[1] that things are not really integrated.
> I would prefer to see "real integration" before we break[0] things by
> moving to 5.0.
> 
> As Geir pointed out recently, we are not just a Class library project,
> so perhaps a change of focus is warranted?  Perhaps if we can agree a
> set of prerequisite goals (involving our JVMs) for moving to 5.0, we can
> ... err ... encourage this change of focus?
> 
> My prerequisite goals would include things like:
> 
> 1) Fix the (reasonable) 'hacks' that help us get this far with drlvm
> integration - e.g. the static libhyprt.a for instance.[2]
> 
> 2) Implement enough of the classlibadapter kernel classes such that
> JCHEVM will run 'ant rebuild' in classlib[3].  We have some difficult
> problems (thread attach) but there is also a lot of low hanging fruit in
> terms of missing or incomplete methods.
> 
> 3) Get drlvm loading with the Harmony launcher from Classlib so we
> can have both drlvm and IBM VME around for testing.  I think this is
> important because it will make it easier for people to test with either
> JVM.

Yes please! The 'ij.exe' confused the crap out of me the first time I saw
it. Also, the Eclipse plugin that DRLVM builds doesn't work if you're using
the 1.0.2 version from the snapshots (new version wins out).

> 
> 4) Change the drlvm build so that its deploy tree layout has no classlib
> files in it.  So we can do ...
> 
> 5) Create the top-level build that can combine the trimmed drlvm deploy
> tree and the classlib deploy tree to produce a working jdk.  (In much
> the same way that we currently combine the classlib and IBM VME.)
> 

I completely agree. Having the IBM VME be just a drop-in after a classlib
build makes it so much easier for class library hackers.

I don't mind flipping the build switch to 5.0 and bumping along with small
increments, but DRLVM needs to be as easy to use as the IBM VME drop in is
first.

> 6) Pull out shared dependencies to top-level so we only need one copy.
> 
> 
> At the moment, I think moving to 5.0 would increase the divide between
> the JVMs and Classlib.
> 
> In the meantime there is still plenty of work to do for those that, for
> whatever reasons, don't find these tasks exciting enough - for instance,
> the missing java.lang.Character/java.lang.Math methods[4].
> 
> Regards,
>  Mark.
> 
> [0] Thanks Geir!
> 
> [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-651
> 
> [2] This isn't a criticism; I think these hacks can be justified.
> 
> [3] I tried this the other day.  It got to the second (non-comment) line
> of the first ant script before crashing because ClassLoader.getResources()
> isn't implemented yet.
> 
> [4] http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-jdk15-
> harmony.html#pkg_java_lang
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message