Weldon, One way to handle this is to write something up on the wiki (http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/) and ask people to comment and then incorporate the comments back. So that we have a record of the discussion and the conclusions. Yes, we need to stick to harmony-dev for now.
Thanks, dims On 5/18/05, Weldon Washburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 17 May 2005 18:27:42 -0600, Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>> "David" == David Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > David> Maybe a concrete example would help. Let's say you have a GC module > > David> written in C. One of it's API calls is to allocate a new object. How > > David> is your JIT module going to produce code to use that API? Via a C > > David> function pointer? > > > > Yes. > > > > One way is to mandate link- or compile-time pluggability only. Then > > this can be done by name. Your JIT just references > > '&harmony_allocate_object' in its source and uses this pointer > > in the code it generates. > > > > The other way is to have the JIT call some central function to get a > > pointer to the allocator function (or functions, in libgcj it turned > > out to be useful to have several). This only needs to be done once, > > at startup. > > > > For folks interested in pluggability, I advise downloading a copy of > > ORP and reading through it. ORP already solved these problems in a > > fairly reasonable way. > > Thanks. I am more than willing to respond to questions about ORP. > Since ORP was last posted to open source, I have done some additional > thinking about interfaces as well as JVM and .NET design in general. > I really look forward to discussing these ideas. It would be great if > we can quickly get to the point where we can discuss interface > details. For example, I would like to start a detailed discussion on > JIT and GC interface header files. Should we start this on the > general harmony-dev list? > Weldon > > > > > Tom > > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
