Hi John, Nice to see this effort moving forward. While reading the JEP, I can't help but think how complicated this sounds for JVM implementors. Is introducing bytecodes and new value type representation definitely a nonstarter? I'm thinking a setup akin to the CLR.
I certainly understand the attraction of keeping bytecode the same, but wouldn't it make the JVM impl more straightforward (and thus more robust, stable, performant, etc) if value types/structs were first class citizens? I'm sure you've thought about this plenty so I'm mostly curious to hear your take on the tradeoffs and generally on how you think this approach will shake out. Thanks Sent from my phone On Nov 7, 2012 4:36 PM, "John Rose" <john.r.r...@oracle.com> wrote: > Thanks! This will move the conversation forward. > > -- John (on my iPhone) > > On Nov 7, 2012, at 1:25 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > > Posted: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/169 > > > > - Mark > _______________________________________________ > mlvm-dev mailing list > mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev >
_______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
