On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 23:33, Mike McGrady wrote: > Like I said, Java 1.6 is incompatible with Java RTS and that os very serious > in my neighborhood. We do QoS with Java RTS. >
That's certainly an interesting comment... I'm curious though: I haven't looked at RT Java for several years, but I recall that the first pass allowed plain Java (i.e. non-real-time) to be executed. Would River components need some other evaluation or testing to be accepted as "real-time" (which I doubt would be an easy task), or would you just be looking for compatibility with the run-time environment, but without real-time guarantees? Also, what would be the impact if the RT system called services that were resident in a non-RT virtual machine? Specifically, would the registrar and/or JavaSpaces implementation need to be hosted in a Java RTS virtual machine? Cheers, Greg. Sent from my iPhone > > Michael McGrady > Principal investigator AF081_028 SBIR > Chief Architect > Topia Technology, Inc > Work 1.253.572.9712 > Cel 1.253.720.3365 > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:03 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > > > On 12/1/2010 4:53 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote: > > ... > >> Some of the discussion has referenced Java CDC on BlueRay. Should > >> these platforms have an overriding influence on whether River moves > >> forward and adopts 1.6 as a baseline? I'm not so sure at this point. > > > > Is the relevant Java dialect identical to 1.4? If not, we would need a > > separate project to make portions of River run on it. > > > > Patricia -- Greg Trasuk, President StratusCom Manufacturing Systems Inc. - We use information technology to solve business problems on your plant floor. http://stratuscom.com
