On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 11:44:46AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > > > Dalibor Topic wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 11:01:57AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > >>We need one. > >> > >>I assume we'd want to do something like the launcher that invokes the VM > >>and then just executes the eclipse compiler. However, now that I've > >>typed this, it sounds awfully slow.... I guess we'll see. Would be > >>nice to have something.... > >> > >>Volunteers or comments? > > > >I am not sure what the status is wrt to including EPLd/CPLd components. > >Can we distribute them? Depend on them? > > We can depend on them, and I'm confident that Real Soon Now it will be > clear that we can distribute. If we can't distribute, we're need to do > as you suggest below.... >
cool. Thanks for helping get all that legalese woodwork worked out, and out of the way. :) cheers, dalibor topic > > > >If no, then we should just write a compiler. I've recently come accross > >fjavac, an interesting little Java compiler project that uses O'caml and > >looks like fun. From the web page: > > > >"Our long term goal is to produce a complete and formal specification of > >Java compilation. To be complete, all language features and rules that > >are informally described in Sun's Java language specification will be > >included. To be formal, the specification will be written in a > >machine-checkable language of a logical framework (Twelf), using only > >axioms and inference rules. Fjava is written in a functional style to > >make such a formalization possible." > > > >see http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~stse/javac/ for details. I have no idea > >what the source code license it, though. But if we are writing compilers > >from scratch, then a ML dialect would be a pretty nice implementation > >language choice. See > >http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/papers/cmljava.html for details. > > > >cheers, > >dalibor topic > > > > > > > > > > > >>geir > > > >
