> We need all kinds of programming tools for JOS (right?). JOS is going to be
> pure bytecode someday (right?). Who is going to developing these
> mostly-bytecode tools?
>
> We should programs written in bytecode to "make" JJOS/decaf on Linux. I
> created a few bulk "make" programs for myself in order to finish a JOS
> distribution. Each program is "package-oriented" so that you make a
> package, not individual classes.
Are these programs just normal java programs, or do they use a UNIX 'make'
type language?
I would far prefer a version of 'make' written in Java, since it allows
you to do all the stuff mentioned below (although it doesn't know about
packages) and much much more.
> Bulk Clean - removes all .class files in a package
> $ bulkclean path=$ package=org.jos.demo [show=all]
>
> Bulk Copy - copies .java files package-by-package
> $ bulkcopy path=/usr/local/example package=org.jos.demo [show=all]
>
> Bulk Compile - compiles all .class files (if necessary)
> $ bulkcompile extrapath=/usr/local/extra.jar package=org.jos.demo [show=all]
>
> Bulk Archive - archives all .class files in a package
> $ bulkarchive archive=demo.jar
>
> All of this can be scripted. All of this can be interactive.
>
> My questions are these: Is anyone else working on mostly-bytecode tools?
>
> My shell scripts work only for me on my machine. JNI is used to create an
> executable program that runs on any Linux machine (like make and find). Has
> anyone written a Java Native Interface program on Linux?
I don't see why you want to use JNI to accomplish this. You can call
system processes with something like System.exec if you want to run
processes on the Host Os. Programs like make and find don't need 'native'
access, they just need to access the file system in the normal java way.
John Leuner
_______________________________________________
Kernel maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
