Thank you Xavier and Johan for the replies. 2012/3/9 fo...@x9c.fr <fo...@x9c.fr>
> > Le 9 mars 2012 à 18:45, Johan Grande a écrit : > > > Le 09/03/2012 18:12, Philippe Veber a écrit : > >> Dear camlers, > >> I used js_of_ocaml several times and was really stunned of how clever > >> (notably because writing interfaces boils down to writing types) and > >> efficient this approach is. Would a similar thing work for the JVM, that > >> is a compiler from ocaml bytecode to java bytecode? > > It is not easy to envision such a tool on the JVM, because of the current > restrictions imposed on Java bytecode. As an example, the size of a method > is currently limited to 64Ko, which is clearly way too small for non > trivial > programs. I see the point. It sure is a problem to reuse the same compilation scheme than in js_of_ocaml. > > > >> I guess it wouldn't > >> provide a full interoperability with java, in the sense that creating or > >> extending classes may not be possible (well, why not after all?). > >> However, being able to run an ocaml program on the JVM reusing existing > >> java libraries would be so useful already! > > I am currently working on this for OCaml-Java (see below). > I must admit one of the most exciting feature of js_of_ocaml (beside efficiency) is the way ocaml interfaces with javascript. I remember the procedure was much heavier with nickel. In another thread ( http://www.mail-archive.com/caml-list@inria.fr/msg02094.html) you said that this has changed in the version you're currently developing. I look forward to see how it works (I'm in if you need alpha testers). > > > >> Are there known obstacles to this? Has anyone tried something in this > >> direction? > > Well, no real obstacle as OCaml-Java showed. > However, OCaml-Java 1.x is still a bare proof of concept due to both > poor design choices and JVM limitations. But then came Java 1.7 and > some limitations were removed (e. g. a garbage collector better suited > to functional languages, and an implementation of method handles). > OCaml-Java has been largely rewritten and now exhibit acceptable > performances. > This is really great. > > > >> Would there be a chance to support multicore programming that > >> way? > > Yes, it is actually working. But not released yet. > Starting from vanilla OCaml, you "only" need two things: > 1/ have a reentrant runtime; > 2/ have a parallel garbage collector. > OCaml-Java implements the former, while all modern JVMs provide the latter. > So, basically, it just works. itou > The great difficulty is then to provide the good > abstractions to make the life of the programmer as easy as possible. > I mean: who would like to program with locks? > Well I'm not much into multicore programming myself, but at least for advertisement purposes, it cannot hurt ;o). > > > >> I hope these are not silly questions (sorry if they are!) > > > > http://ocamljava.x9c.fr > > Thanks for the plug. However, OCaml-Java is quite different and provides > two tools: > - an equivalent of ocamlrun written in Java (meaning you can interpret > OCaml bytecode inside a JVM); > - an equivalent of ocamlc/ocamlopt for Java (meaning you can compile > OCaml sources to Java jar files to be executed by a JVM). > Thanks for the news and clarifications! > > > Kind regards, > > Xavier Clerc > > > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > > -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
