Jason van Zyl wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box, (I compiled some code on a quad processor machine and ant didn't
really seem to move that much faster then on my laptop) but if I compile
ant using gjc would it take advantage of a multi-processor
Daniel Rall wrote:
Also, would you point me to a
reference on how memory management is handled?
It uses the Boehm collector. For full details see here:
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/
It is a conservative collector that can also implement garbage
collection for C and C++,
Daniel Rall wrote:
Does the bytecode interpreter [from gcj] handle class loading yet?
Yes. You can invoke the bytecode interpreter directly with gij if you
don't want to compile. Gij will handle Class.forName and friends
correctly.
If you compile to native code, the resulting executable
Kevin A. Burton wrote:
The big companies (Microsoft, IBM, SUN, etc) have been the ones creating the
standards. IETF, JCP, W3C, etc are all good examples.
Actually I think the IETF is the exception, which is why I think it
could be a good starting point if people wanted to do their own
Peter Donald wrote:
Hell no. Look at all the pety bitching and moaning that goes on now -
definetly not conducive to standards bodys which are meant to define
specifications via which multiple groups can compete on implementations.
You obviously haven't subscribed to any IETF mailing
Peter Donald wrote:
ie If we could set up a decent process and work with other standards
organizations (ECMA, IEEE, W3C), have a relatively formal
participation contract (and thus *safe* from eyes of corporate/IP
lawyers) and finally make allies of organisations like IBM, Apple
and whoever
I was thinking about another way of pushing Jakarta, partly in the
context of the issue with Sun. If there was an open process for
standard setting, it could make Sun's closed process less important.
The IETF does well at being open, but I don't think they would get
involved in something like
Vic Cekvenich wrote:
Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
Do you feel that the idea of an EJB-like system is bad, or just that
EJBs specifically were badly designed? I would be interested to hear
your thoughts on a better alternative.
I feel that web programming is
