On Nov 26, 2007 8:53 PM, Dan Bornstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 21, 2007 1:24 AM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Out of curiosity, did you have to make any significant changes to > > Harmony in order to suit your needs? Perhaps you can share some > > experiences, and a wish list. > > We have indeed made a few significant changes, which I think fall into > one of these general categories: > > * Rewrite or import code as native C/C++ to make things faster. > (Examples: ICU for character encoding and regular expressions, OpenSSL > for crypto code.) > * Reduce memory usage, but make things slower. (Example: Localized > exception message formatting.) > * Reduce runtime configurability, to make things faster and simpler. > (Example: The Logging library.) > * Adapt code or write new code to be happy running inside the Dalvik > VM. (Example: The reflection code.) > > We don't have a "wish list" per se. But if I get one wish it is that > we figure out a good way to keep the Dalvik version of the library > code from diverging too far from Harmony, as both projects continue on > their respective trajectories. That is, I want us to be able to > cleanly maintain the *necessary* differences and minimize (dare I > hope, eliminate?) the *unnecessary* differences.
Hopefully the modularity of the class library is helping in this arena. Any comments or thoughts on the breakdown of the class library modules would be appreciated. The Android/Dalvik usage is different enough to provide some good feedback. -Nathan > > I apologize that I can't be more specific than that, at this point. > > -dan >
