On 5/19/05, Ahmed Saad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Then, if the VM is written in Java it will be compiled to native code > using, > >for example, gcj? > >or it will be compiled to byte code and will be interpreted by itself?
One could interpret the VM code but it would be too slow for many. A better choice is to run the bytecode through a JIT or ahead of time compiler then execute the machine code. This binary image could be created at development time then distributed thus saving the end-user time and confusion. Yes, it is confusing. I am convinced that in the long term the JVM and the underlying OS will merge and that 90+ percent of the combination will be written in a type-safe language (either Java or C#). In the short term, I believe we should develop Harmony in C/C++ with a migration path to a type-safe language (either ECMA CLI based or Java.) > >I'm a little bit confused about this topic > > same goes here > > On 5/18/05, Juan Leyva Delgado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Then, if the VM is written in Java it will be compiled to native code > > using, > > for example, gcj? > > or it will be compiled to byte code and will be interpreted by itself? > > > > I'm a little bit confused about this topic > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 4:46 PM > > Subject: Re: Developing Harmony > > > > > > > Ozgur Akan wrote: > > >> JVM in Java will be the slower then Sun`s JVM. C or C++ is a better > > >> choice. > > > > > > You have to undertand that "written in Java" does *NOT* equate > > necessarely > > > as "will be run as interpreted bytecode". > > > > > > -- > > > Stefano. > > > > > > > > > > > >
