Isn't that kind of obvious? We are well on the path of pluggable languages on top of the VM, seems like an obvious next step to have pluggable VM's underneath. Don't like PermGenSpace problems of the JVM, use the CLR or Parrot. Don't like hotspot performance of the CLR, use JVM or Parrot. VM tolerance is IMHO opinion one of the most interesting aspects of upcoming languages like Scala and Fantom. If we can swap out the VM, then we truly have choice and competition.
On Nov 16, 10:31 pm, Miroslav Pokorny <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Ben Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 16 Nov., 12:32, Carl Jokl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Part of my curiosity is perhaps idle thinking of whether one VM could > > > be created which is capable of running multiple different platforms. > > >http://vmkit.llvm.org/ > > > Instead of asking how, but why ? Only one of the hosted vms will ever be > > native all others will require translation/emulation of respective lifecycle > things...why would anyone want a vm like that ? It would be a total mess, > how many String classes would it have (java, dotnet etc), its would be total > madness and a large mess that would ultimately be many times more complex > and a lot harder to enhance in the future because one would always be > fearful of breaking or changing the behaviour of one of the hosted vms. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
