On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Bennie Kloosteman <[email protected]>wrote:
> Agree on this improve an existing runtime or fork something like rust > anything else you need very deep pockets. > > I dont think the JVM is easier to adopt .. > > JVM doesn't implement unboxed types, so it's a *particularly* bad match for BitC. The problem with Mono performance is interesting. It's very possible that two or three people, contributing actively, could make a *huge* improvement in Mono performance. But as you note, the JIT implementation in mono was a fairly small fraction of the effort. It's not at all out of the question that one could simply build a new and better JIT and re-use most of the library infrastructure investment that Mono has already made. Since "mono" is taken, the successor could perhaps be named after some more aggressive disease. Perhaps "Spanish Flu". :-) shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
