> From: Brian Jones
>
> "John Keiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >      Right now we only support Japhar.  But we want to support
> multiple VMs.
>
> Yes.
>
> > The simplest way to do this is to provide two JAR files: one, the
> > VM-independent stuff (everything not in vm/reference), and two, the
> > VM-dependent stuff.  This makes it so that we can support multiple VMs
> > without too much trouble.
>
> Well, before providing a solution, perhaps backup and elucidate the
> problem.  Right now, supposing the --with-kaffe stuff worked (and we
> had the kaffe dependent stuff coded) then to get Classpath to work
> with Kaffe I would just reconfigure and recompile.  (the native stuff
> is different as well I guess...).
>
> If you wanted to argue that you want to be able to compile Classpath
> for every VM all at once, I could see that.
>

The are two issues with that:

1. Why package two giant Classpath distributions for two different VMs when
over 95% of the classes (probably more like 97-98% when all classes are in)
will be identical in each distribution?

2. The VM should be able to package the VM interface classes *apart* from
Classpath.  We should not even have to know they are writing their VM for
Classpath, they should just be able to plug in.

Do we really want to provide a bunch of different distributions for
different VMs, or do we just have one product with hooks people can plug in
to?

There are a whole *slew* of options that would be nice to add eventually,
not just --package=java.beans ... think about --spec=personaljava
and --spec=embeddedjava too.  I think all those issues are the same, though,
and distinct from this issue.  They are just about setting up a file that
says which classes are to be included for a particular spec.  This is about
allowing VMs to plug in without CVS access or even contact with the
developers.

Perhaps it's a pipe dream, but we don't know that yet.  Rather than nix the
idea altogether, we should try and brainstorm ways around the Sealing
restriction.  I think it's a goal worth achieving.

--John Keiser

Reply via email to