Thanks for the cross-post, Patrick. One more item is NetBeans
support, which maybe someone on this list can help with:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mlvm-dev/2009-January/
000336.html
On Jan 21, 2009, at 4:57 AM, Patrick Wright wrote:
> For those not following the Multi-Language Virtual Machine ("DaVinci
> Machine") mailing list [1], there is a new thread [2] with updates on
> the status of various sub-projects.
I think once we have basic support in Java for method handles,
invokedynamic, and exotic identifiers, we can use Java as a system
language to write language runtime support in many cases where we'd
otherwise have to roll the bytecodes by hand.
(Tailcalls are another important feature for runtimes; clearly
runtime systems want to use tailcalls to delegate bits of work
between modules without adding to the control stack. That will come
pretty soon, thanks to Arnold.)
As Attila said at the Summit in September, this new stuff probably
has strong implications on the design of a MOP. The main example is
using method handles to express units of procedural semantics; the
MOP's job of handing out such units is streamlined if those units can
be directly invoked (as in invokevirtual or invokedynamic) by the MOP
client, instead of called through a reflective veil of boxed
varargs. Getting this working requires that the client code which
uses the MOP must be able to emit method handle calls. If the Java
language supports these things, then the MOP clients can be written
using javac not just ASM, which makes a JSR 292-based MOP viable.
-- John
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" 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/jvm-languages?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
