> But with one bytecode set being translated to another and then natively > compiled to native code means a lot of time is getting wasted. Emulating the > different semantics of the vm lifecycle also means more emulation and more > wasted cpus...Nothing is free. > > Who's translating bytecode?
The source code gets parsed and processed by the compiler into a syntax tree, as the final stage of compilation this is then translated into bytecode for a target VM. All of this is done statically, at compile time. If you then want to target a different VM, you substitute a different final stage in the compiler. The only runtime translation that takes place is within the JIT compiler of the VM itself (from bytecode to native). Or do I misunderstand you, and your primary objection is to the concept of VMs in general? -- Kevin Wright mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected] pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright twitter: @thecoda -- 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.
