Dan Bornstein wrote: >> I wonder if there any possibility of code reuse >> between DRLVM and Dalvik. >> >> Which chances have JIT, GC, a verifier, or any other part of DRLVM to >> be reused? > > If the JIT or verifier are based on the bytecode you might find in a > typical .class file, then I doubt those components will be reusable. > Dalvik uses a different bytecode. We already verify it, and if/when we > do a JIT, the JIT would be taking Dalvik bytecode / .dex files as > input. > > Our allocator today is a fairly simple one built on top of dlmalloc. I > know we will want something a bit more complex at some point, and the > DRLVM related code very well may fit the bill. The overriding concerns > we will have will be minimizing memory overhead and maximizing cache > locality. We already know, for example, that we will want to do stuff > to ensure that we can have a (section of the) heap which is shared > copy-on-write between processes, but where running gc wouldn't force a > copy; this means that mark bits would have to be segregated from the > objects that are being marked. > >> Are you interested in developing common runtime building >> blocks in Apache? > > Put perhaps overly bluntly: I am interested in shipping a good solid > Android 1.0. I am also interested in sharing as much of the Android > work as makes sense. But shipping is my #1 priority.
As a 'meta-comment', there are a number of people here who share an interest in Apache licensed managed runtimes, and have some considerable experience with it. I think it will be valuable to maintain communication between the projects (and I know you share that POV). Regards, Tim
