On 5/13/05, Steve Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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?
This kind of language already exists, it is called the "D" language. I dont know much about it but it has very nice features that are combined from C\C++ and JAVA. But the idea of implementing the JIT in JAVA sounds much more interesting. > > > > > > 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). > > > > > > > > >
