I though there was some optimizing transformations implemented for Maxine JVM... Wouldn't it be cool to reuse those?
regards, Eugene On Dec 17, 4:36 pm, Charles Oliver Nutter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Matt Fowles <[email protected]> wrote: > > Eugene~ > > That is also on my list of things to do. As it stands, Janino rolls its own > > bytecode classes (which I have found and fixed a few bugs in), but not > > having the code at all would be even better. > > Of course, if you wanted to beat me to it, I wouldn't stop you ;-) > > Matt > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Eugene Kuleshov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> It would be neat if Janino used ASM's backend for bytecode > >> generation. Then you could feed its output into the class > >> transformations or use Janino's Java syntax tree object model to > >> construct code and convert it into the bytecode after that. > > Yeah, it seems like there's a coalescing of tools needed here. Janino > to use ASM, and maybe something from Soot too provide an optimization > phase in front or in back. > > Tobias (from Jython) also had started working on an optimizing SSA > compiler for JVM, but I don't think he's had a chance to return to > that work. So once again, we're all rolling our own pieces when we > could be collaborating. Stop the madness! > > - Charlie -- 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.
