I hadn't thought that to write a JIT compiler you're writing a native compiler for Java anyway, so you might as well use this to create your VM, obvious really!
There's a certain beauty to creating the VM in the language it is there to interpret. It does suggest we want to write the JIT first, then use this as our compiler for generating the VM..? On 5/13/05, David Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I thought GCJ was a static compilation system? What I was thinking of > was fully dynamic JIT-style compilation. A lot of the problems with > using C as the implementation language stem from it's statically > compiled nature. Not to mention the craziness of having > platform-specific code generation and optimisation duplicated in both > the C compiler and the Java JIT. (Which admittedly GCJ avoids). > > Cheers, > > Dave > > On 5/13/05, Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > So why not invent a new language that is a kind of half way house > > > between C and Java? > > > > I think that GCJ gives you this "third way" already. And it comes with > > a GC, which once explicitly managed, could be used as the Harmony GC as > > well. (GCJ's GC has an older pedigree, I believe). > > > > >
