Other interesting things that can be achieved are some sorts of high
performance "tunning" aspects, which are very interesting, and using gcc
power might be more interesting than redoing it from scratch, either, at
the begining of current project, or maybe forever.
An adequate "bundle" of gcc and harmony might produce a JIT/WAT
java/bytecode compilation. Moreover, the compilation parameters might be
"tuneable" by the JVM administrator and choose between compilation
speed, compilation performance, memory footprint, etc.
Appart from code-reusing, there is also an adequate sort of abstraction
that is good here. and concentrating on this, we avoid discussing
machine level details as we all agree that GCC is portable, performant
and adequate.
Summing up, I support the idea of a java/bytecode to C compiler that can
be bundled with gcc. As stated we would gain portability and we can use
all facilities provided by gcc.
Ariel
Archie Cobbs wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The approach of using C Compiler generated code rather than writing a
full compiler appeals to me:
http://www.csc.uvic.ca/~csc586a/papers/ertlgregg04.pdf
I am curious on how well the approach performs compared to existing
JITs.
I'm admittedly biased, but the approach of using the C compiler has
some good benefits, mainly in portability. This is especially true for
architectures like x86 that have a complicated instruction set, where
optmization is a subtle art. Though JC uses the C compiler as a WAT
instead of a JIT, it is very portable (to any architecture that GCC
targets) as a result. To the extent that portability is a goal, this
might make sense as an approach to take, at least initially.
-Archie
__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * CTO, Awarix *
http://www.awarix.com
