Can we have a look at the vmi.h and the list of 18 classes, and specially the two classes required for integration ? Besides, I would also like to know the changes/extensions you have thought till date for 1.5 spec. To me, it seems that there should be a lot of extensions given the fact that 1.5 has put in more efforts to give closer "insider" look in the VM.
-Akhilesh. > On Jul 11, 2005, at 12:14 PM, Tim Ellison wrote: > > The principal goals are to enable the class libraries to be hosted on > > different versions of a virtual machine, and potentially different > > virtual machines, without sacrificing performance or introducing > > complexity. In our design, this results in a number of class types > > being (architecturally) labeled as 'kernel classes'. Kernel > > classes can > > be thought of as part of the VM and have to be written by the > > VM-provider. With a thoughtful set of kernel classes the API from > > class > > library to the VM, and from VM to class libraries, can be kept > > remarkably small. Our complete VM/Classlibrary interface comprises a > > short C header (vmi.h), about 18 classes defined by 1.4 public API ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > (java.lang, java.lang.reflect, ...), and two classes that are > > specifically to support the interface. We are working on necessary > > extensions to this interface for 1.5.
