On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > >> 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. > > So what happens to all the tools for analysis and bytecode enhancements that work on one bytecode set and not the other ? > 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- mP -- 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.
