OK - I'm going to bite.
Why are we doing this? If we're shipping a general purpose bytecode
manipulation library, then why is it private?
Surely this should become an official, supported public API?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
On 02/17/2015 08:30 PM,
How about a 1.5 day conference on Thursday 30th morning of Friday 31st
January?
Then people who are coming to Europe for FOSDEM can arrive in London on
Weds, have the language summit for 1.5 days we can all get the Eurostar
to Brussels together to arrive in time for the Delerium cafe?
Thanks,
+1
Stockholm's nice. Or there's always London...
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Marcus Lagergren
marcus.lagerg...@oracle.com wrote:
+1 to that. We could probably host something in Stockholm too, if there
is interest. (We are the third largest Oracle JVM engineering site in the
world
I think that one may surmise that it is at least adequate.
The 100% conformance to spec is kind of cool too.
Ben
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Dain Sundstrom d...@iq80.com wrote:
Nice. How is the performance so far?
-dain
On Dec 22, 2012, at 12:56 AM, Attila Szegedi szege...@gmail.com
Hi Charlie,
Can you send us a decent link or two once it actually does drop. I'm
not much of a Ruby head generally, but would like to see the numbers
(and, of course, take a quick look at their testing / benching
methodology).
Thanks,
Ben
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
head...@headius.com wrote:
I will indeed! Just preparing ahead of time for the hype machine to go
into overdrive. Regardless of initial speed, there's an incredibly
long tail to any Ruby implementation, and new ones won't be useful
until
Please include a link to your entire project, including the test harness.
Microbenchmarks are tricky things, and it will be easier to have a good
discussion if others can independently reproduce your results.
Thanks,
Ben
On 28 Sep 2012 11:42, Raffaello Giulietti raffaello.giulie...@gmail.com
First off, note that the maximum resolution available on OS X is
microsecond level.
This means that any timings of any intervals of the order of 1us (or
less) will be reporting whether or not you caught a clock edge, not
the actual timing interval.
You can probably model this using a uniform
Hi,
My understanding is that lambdas are currently a separate hg forest
(to allow the lambdas team to go faster), and that the team will be
bringing code across from lambdas into jdk8 mainline, and then
rebaselining.
So it may not be possible to build a combined jdk8 + lambdas at the
moment.
Exactly.
With Adopt-A-JSR and some of the other projects we're pushing, getting a
broader community trying out JDK 8 is a great complement.
There are a lot of Mac users in our community, and having simple installers
is a big help.
Thanks,
Ben
On Nov 7, 2011 12:09 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
head...@headius.comwrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Ben Evans
benjamin.john.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
With my LJC hat on, once the current flurry of activity has died down a
bit,
encouraging and supporting interested LJC members
Hi John,
To my mind, this is a bit of a foxy one.
As I've been working more with MHs and indy, I've become convinced that the
set of use cases is actually much larger than I first thought (although this
may be down to an initial lack of imagination on my part).
So, on the one hand, I feel that
I say get rid of vestigial packages / names as soon as possible.
Thanks,
Ben
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com wrote:
OpenJDK b135 has JVM support for the new package name java.dyn.invoke, and
therefore the new API names can be used with a b135 JVM plus a
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
head...@headius.comwrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 1:25 PM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com wrote:
These results are very useful, and you are very welcome to post them. We
all need to see how things are shaping up in user experiences so
Hi,
I've noticed some oddities with b130 MethodHandles (this is x64 Ubuntu):
private void foo() {
System.out.println(Foo!);
}
private void run(String[] args) {
MethodHandle mh;
MethodType desc =
I think this is somewhat of a red herring.
After all, there are many classes which live in java.lang which are
fundamental to the operation of the platform, and which any language which
lived on top of the VM would have an intimate relationship with (eg Object,
Class, String, etc).
If we are
Hi,
A small group of developers in London are starting to look at implementing a
version of perl on the MLVM. We're aware that we're likely to have both
syntactic and semantic issues (due to perl's somewhat idiosyncratic nature)
but we thought we'd try anyway, and just see how far we can get and
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
charles.nut...@sun.com wrote:
Ben Evans wrote:
After trying several other builds, I can get a clean build providing I
start with SoyLatte.
However, if I try to use any OpenJDK7 build (including Langdon's
binaries from last Summer
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Ben Evans
benjamin.john.ev...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/4/10 John Rose john.r...@sun.com
On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Ben Evans wrote:
...
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 25 seconds
gnumake: *** [build] Error 2
Can you say why gnumake is reporting
2009/4/10 John Rose john.r...@sun.com
On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Ben Evans wrote:
...
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 25 seconds
gnumake: *** [build] Error 2
Can you say why gnumake is reporting error status 2? Did ant complain
somewhere? When I try an incremental rebuild, the last
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
charles.nut...@sun.com wrote:
Ok, another attempt. John Rose has rebased the patches for bsd-port, and
I've got a build running. The above instructions are ok, except that
RELAX_CHECKS=true was necessary for the make portion. So my
Hi Charlie,
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
charles.nut...@sun.com wrote:
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
So the steps I've got so far, roughly:
1. check out BSD port and prepare it for build, a la Stephen Bannasch's
instructions here:
Hi,
I've been doing some reading about how TCO is intended to be implemented.
As I understand it, the bytecode for a optimised tail call would look
something like this:
0xc4 wide
0xb6 invokevirtual
0x00 // high byte of index of method to call
0x03 // low byte of index of method to call
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Evans wrote:
OK, so I have 2 separate source trees, one which is b38, which does not
have bsd-specific source in it, and one which is b33 with bsd ported
code.
So, essentially I'm trying to apply
24 matches
Mail list logo
