[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU)
From: |
Norbert Bollow |
Subject: |
[DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU) |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:00:17 +0200 |
I wrote:
> > this sounds very much like anti-Java FUD to me. Please be
> > specific. What are the problems of the plan that has been
> > proposed? How would it "pollute our system with legal baggage"?
> > (Nota bene, the proposal is to start with a free JVM
> > implementation)
Martin Coxall <address@hidden> replied:
> My career is Java. I have no need to FUD.
Then please provide the requested specifics.
> What I am worried about is blindly allowing an implementation
> of a privately owned set of specifications forming the core of
> a very important free software project.
I can assure you that we're not planning to go about this
blindly. We know that the choice of bytecode is a crucial
decision for the project, and the time has come to look at
the various reasonable options. My current list of reasonable
options is this:
a) Johan Hanson's proposal
Start with Java bytecode, the Java language and the Java libraries.
Then, extend the bytecode and runtime environment to have
features that are supported by Microsoft's bytecode.
Design the modifications to the bytecode so that a recompiler from
CLR bytecode to DotGNU bytecode would be as simple as possible.
Start with Kaffee or some other existing Java implementation that
is licensed under the GPL. (if any)
b) Use and extend Portable.NET
Endorse IL and C#, extending them as necessary. Use and
contribute to Rhys Weatherley's efforts to write a good
C# compiler and runtime system in C
The website of Rhys Weatherley's Portable.NET project is
at http://www.southern-storm.com.au/portable_net.html
I would like to invite everyone to make suggestions for items
that maybe should be added to this list of "reasonable options".
Greetings, Norbert.
--
Norbert Bollow, Weidlistr.18, CH-8624 Gruet (near Zurich, Switzerland)
Your own domain with all your Mailman lists: $15/month http://cisto.com
Business Coaching for Internet Entrepreneurs ---> http://thinkcoach.com
Tel +41 1 972 20 59 Fax +41 1 972 20 69 address@hidden
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, (continued)
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Jeremy Petzold, 2001/07/16
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Jeremy Petzold, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Martin Coxall, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Kent Nguyen, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Martin Coxall, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Jeremy Petzold, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Martin Coxall, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Norbert Bollow, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU, Martin Coxall, 2001/07/18
- [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU),
Norbert Bollow <=
- Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU), David Sugar, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU), Norbert Bollow, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU), Adam Theo, 2001/07/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU), tali streit, 2001/07/19
- Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility (was Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU)), Bradley M. Kuhn, 2001/07/22
- Re: Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility (was Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU)), Bradley M. Kuhn, 2001/07/22
- Re: Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility (was Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU)), tali streit, 2001/07/23
- Re: Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility (was Re: [DotGNU]Choice of bytecode spec (was: Support Java for .GNU)), Dan Kuykendall (Seek3r), 2001/07/23
- [DotGNU]Re: Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility, tali streit, 2001/07/23
- [DotGNU]Re: Java issues, and Microsoft.NET compatibility, Norbert Bollow, 2001/07/23