Jakob == Jakob Praher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. Performance. The result has to be reasonable competitive
performance wise. E.g., starting eclipse has to be reasonable both in
time and space.
Jakob How are doing with gcj in this direction?
I'm not sure I understand. We do ok right now
hi Tom,
Tom Tromey wrote:
Jakob == Jakob Praher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jakob do we want to build something that competes with sun j2se/mono on the
Jakob desktop side (gnome/redhat would be interested in that)
I don't speak for Red Hat, but I can explain a little about why we
ship gcj
hi Geir,
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 8:18 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 5:24 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:
Both of these are conventional expectations, and we can meet this via
pluggability, right?
If you have for instance completly
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: timeframe for mid-level decissions
From the llvm web site: LLVM does not currently support garbage
collection of multi-threaded programs or GC-safe points other than
function calls, but these will be added in the future as there is
interest. I
hi David,
thanks for pointing that out. I haven't looked into the application but,
some notes from my side.
David Griffiths wrote:
From the llvm web site: LLVM does not currently support garbage
collection of multi-threaded programs or GC-safe points other than
function calls, but these will
Jakob == Jakob Praher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jakob do we want to build something that competes with sun j2se/mono on the
Jakob desktop side (gnome/redhat would be interested in that)
I don't speak for Red Hat, but I can explain a little about why we
ship gcj and not other VMs. In addition
Tom Tromey wrote:
3. Debugging. There has to be some debugger story.
Harmony would have to excel on all of these before I would even
consider, say, recommending it for FC.
This is an important point. If the VM should be usable for a developer
it must support debugging. If it is to be
I've put some corrections in, so that its more understandable.
Jakob Praher wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 5:24 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:
I don't understand
Take classpath project. It aims at working accross open vms. So you have
to build a glue layer between what is
On May 19, 2005, at 8:18 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 5:24 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:
- do we want to concentrate on the server side (jikes rvm would
probably be fine for that) - for instance: no startup issues
- do we want to build something that competes
: Thursday, May 19, 2005 11:33 PM
(BTo: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
(BSubject: Re: timeframe for mid-level decissions
(B
(BFrom the llvm web site: "LLVM does not currently support garbage
(Bcollection of multi-threaded programs or GC-safe points other than
(Bfunction calls, but thes
(BI like it.
(B
$B!d(B* Work together with the GCJ people to build a really fast AOT-compiler
$B!d(Bthat also works with LLVM based Execution Engine
(B
(BI which case we theoretically have a JIT at supposedly low cost...
(B(translating bytecode to bytecode /without having to optimize it/
11 matches
Mail list logo
