I don't see the interest of implementing JSR 292 on top of DLR,
because DLR provides only one (in fact two) semantics for method resolution.
A combination of LINQ expression tree + CLR seems easier to use
but I don't know .Net enough to be sure that MutableCallSite#syncAll [1]
can be implemented.
Rémi
http://download.java.net/jdk7/docs/api/java/lang/invoke/MutableCallSite.html#syncAll%28java.lang.invoke.MutableCallSite[]%29
On 06/10/2011 05:35 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
And you get to do your workshop opposite John Rose on invokedynamic.
That's inconvenient, since I'd like to attend both.
DLR seemed like automatic to me, but I actually agree with going around it too.
As far as using DLR goes...
PRO:
* We can enlist in other DLR language dispatch, and invokedynamic will
be analogous to C# "dynamic".
* Ideally the plumbing is already there for building optimized
intermediate stubs; we'd essentially just generate CallSite +
MethodHandle chains into CLR DynamicMethod bodies and dispatch through
them that way. Very similar to Rémi's JSR-292 backport.
CON:
* Going direct would allow us to skip any less-desirable aspects of
the DLR dispatch chain. I don't know what those might be, though.
* We'll lose any infrastructure support for dyncalling, including
interop with DLR languages.
It's going to be a fun JVM-LS this year :)
- Charlie
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Jeroen Frijters<jer...@sumatra.nl> wrote:
I haven't done any serious invokedynamic work (since my ancient prototyping),
but my current thinking is to build it directly on top of the CLR and not use
the DLR, but maybe I'll change my mind after the summit :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: jvm-languages@googlegroups.com [mailto:jvm-
langua...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Oliver Nutter
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2011 15:55
To: jvm-languages@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [jvm-l] JVM Summit'11 (agenda)
Looks great! Jeroen will be there for iKVM, that's so cool. Maybe we can
get him to add invokedynamic using DLR? :D
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Rémi Forax<fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
The agenda of the JVM Summit has been published.
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/mlvm/jvmlangsummit/agenda.html
Rémi
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JVM Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JVM Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jvm-
languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
