At 9:52 AM +0100 5/1/02, Leon Brocard wrote:
>Cute, huh? Of course, Java interpreters are very optimised (and
>non-dynamic) and without JITs doing it in Parrot is about 6 times
>slower, but it's interesting nevertheless. Is this the kind of thing I
>should be doing? I've attached a fledgling jvm.ops. Does my C code
>look ok?
I like it, it looks good, and I'm having very scary thoughts about
Java and Parrot. Thoughts like: "How about we build Java method call
shims so Java cna call Parrot and vice versa?" or "How about we
emulate the JNI interface and use native libs built for Java?" And,
of course, I'm having similar thoughts about .NET now...
Being able to do this would give us a pretty significant leg up in
terms of library code, if it works.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
