harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Johnny Kewl" <j...@kewlstuff.co.za>
Subject Greetings Earthlings
Date Sat, 01 Mar 2008 04:52:04 GMT
Thanks for letting me join the group...
My job is not in IT, although thats my first love, and second, and third... actually where
is my wife?

Gee, I stopped using C++ at VC6 and I cant believe how rusty I am, I hardly recognise it,
was a time when I used to whiz around in WTL... unbelievable.

I'm also struggling to get the thing compiled... the C code... I'm running on XP, running
the ant from eclipse and have VS 2005/2008 installed, it just wont get through that C code.
It will say... dont know what sprintf is so I'll jam in <stdlib> then it will say POSIX
_itoa violation... blah blah..

I'm just messing too much with the code for my liking... its already Harmony "something else".
Does anyone here actually work on the MS platform? Am I wasting my time?

I know its because MS does its own thing in headers... also get _WIN_NT_VER conflicts... the
libs are
trying to got to XP and the code is declaring NT4 ... so not looking good.

Anyway if you know where I'm going wrong... yell ;)


Before I go any further, the thing I'm interested in is seeing if a Java Lite is possible...
my gutt tells me that JVM's in general bulk up too quickly.

1) How small does one think one can make a JRE... say for example there was just a JOPtionPane
that said "Hello Harmony"...
When I look at this and other JRE's... it seems Java bulks up very quickly, I'm guessing that
just to run one line of java, the JRE would already be sitting
at 5 megs... do you also think that is about right?

If you think about C++... it more or less it follows a "more application == more engine" rule.
JRE's naturally are carrying the "OS", but they dont seem to be able to do that.
The actual native components are not that big... but they still seem to have to bulk up a
lot to run "one line" of Java code.

To me thats a great pity... because if a JRE did not have to "bulk up"... ie it followed a
"more application = more engine" pattern, then Java itself
would be deliverable... and that would make that JRE very special.
50k application + 500k JRE
100k application + 700k JRE
1000k application + 1500k JRE
... if you see what I'm getting at..

As soon as its 50k application + 15 meg JRE.... we now asking users to "please" install the
JRE separately, and we just hope they can find the site
and know the difference between JDK J2SE and all the rest... a MS user will probably be in
the .Net site totally confused between J# and J2SE ;)
Yes there are installers but imagine 550k... and not 15 megs... 

So... thats what I'm wondering about and thats why I'm here...

2) Then I got another question... how interchangable are the actual JRE's.... if I swapped
out java.exe for java.with a feather... ie no class changes...
how far would that get?

So hopefully I havnt disturbed you too much... and I got so many questions... I'm holding
myself back here ;)
But as a user I just wanted to say something... compatability is very important, but after
that, creativity takes precedence over standardisation...
ie as a user if theres an engine that runs my code, and does other cool things... I dont care
where it comes from.

So what do you think, possible... or the science just says no? Java Lite cant be. Java lite
is not possible in the current architecture... ???

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message