Oracle Basic (Powerobjects), Basic-like language running on the JVM, ever ?

2010-04-10 Thread Fernando Cassia
Hi there, 1) I´ve read that the goal of this JSR and project is to bring other languages to the JVM with the same performance as java bytecode. Would this be like what Mono currently has?, I mean, the ability to develop third party add-ons that interface with the JVM engine, thus allowing for plen

Re: Loop handle

2010-04-10 Thread John Rose
On Apr 10, 2010, at 3:01 PM, James Thorpe wrote: > If CPS is out - what about passing the loop condition and body into a > function that does the looping for you. http://blogs.sun.com/jrose/resource/jsr292/LoopHandle.zip -- John ___ mlvm-dev mailing

Re: Loop handle

2010-04-10 Thread James Thorpe
If CPS is out - what about passing the loop condition and body into a function that does the looping for you. in pseudo code defn loop_fn(cond, body) while (cond()) do body() end end this avoids the need for tail calls entirely - and I presume the whole lot

Re: Loop handle

2010-04-10 Thread Charles Oliver Nutter
With tail calling, it would certainly be possible. I think the tradeoff would be accepting that you wouldn't be able to completely compose a body of code in one shot; somewhere downstream you'd have to defer a decision like whether to exit the loop or not. That would probably mean slicing the nativ

dynalang-invoke updated for latest JSR-292 API

2010-04-10 Thread Attila Szegedi
Folks, I just updated the dynalang-invoke SVN trunk tip to use the latest JSR-292 API (as documented on ). It works with latest prebuilt Mac OS X MLVM that Stephen Bannasch put up at

Re: JSR 292 RI status & javadoc checkpoint

2010-04-10 Thread Attila Szegedi
Hi, I'm updating my dyanalang-invoke module for the changes in the RI. Overall, all looks good. I noticed some things have been fixed, i.e. unreflect/findVirtual etc. now correctly create a MH with a MethodType that indicates the correct receiver type (and not generic java.lang.Object) even if

Loop handle

2010-04-10 Thread James Thorpe
This idea is a real gem! Would it not be possible to remove the need for a looping handle by a CPS conversion? James. On 10/04/2010, at 5:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I ask because I still have a perverse desire to follow up on an idea > John Rose gave me to implement