Re: jvm.ops

At 9:52 AM +0100 5/1/02, Leon Brocard wrote:
>Cute, huh? Of course, Java interpreters are very optimised (and
>non-dynamic) and without JITs doing it in Parrot is about 6 times
>slower, but it's interesting nevertheless. Is this the kind of thing I
>should be doing? I've attached a fledgling jvm.ops. Does my C code
>look ok?

I like it, it looks good, and I'm having very scary thoughts about 
Java and Parrot. Thoughts like: "How about we build Java method call 
shims so Java cna call Parrot and vice versa?" or "How about we 
emulate the JNI interface and use native libs built for Java?" And, 
of course, I'm having similar thoughts about .NET now...

Being able to do this would give us a pretty significant leg up in 
terms of library code, if it works.
-- 
                                         Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                       teddy bears get drunk

• jvm.ops by Leon Brocard
• Re: jvm.ops by Dan Sugalski