Sorry about that, what I meant in relation to a common vm, and admittedly I was implicitly referring to browser contexts, was a standardised vm responsible for interpretation potentially multiple languages, as opposed to just one (personally I think v8 JIT Vm rocks, but that's a language specific interpreter, I was thinking more in line with the philosophy of JVM DaVinci)
David Foley | Senior Software Architect +353 87 667 4504 Skype: david.d.foley On 12 May 2011, at 23:26, Mikeal Rogers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> However, what if, rather than trying to consolidate legacy with emerging >> (naive or otherwise) expectations of the languages evolution, that focus is >> put instead upon a polysemetic interpreter, a common VM, which language >> authors can utilise to their own ends (within constraints), whereby the >> principles of JavaScript dynamism define it's operational >> boundaries. >> > You lost me at "common VM". > > We currently have some of the fastest VMs in the world as a direct result of > strong competition between VMs. Even better, the VMs are healthily stealing > good ideas from each other as all of them are open source. So far we've had > the best possibly outcome and I wonder what there could possibly be to gain > from consolidation. > > -Mikeal
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
