Weldon Washburn wrote: > On 7/11/05, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Recently, within IBM, we have been defining the interface between IBM's >>class library and the J9 VM. We deliberately haven't looked at the GNU >>Classpath/VM interface specification. >> >>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. >> >>If there is an interest, we can share the interface we are using and >>evolve it as part of harmony. > > > Tim, > It would be good if you would go ahead and post the VM/Classlibrary > interface you describe above on harmony wiki. > Thanks > Weldon
I'm just about to leave for a week's vacation, so rather than post and then disappear, I'll wait until I get back and can engage in proper discussion. Regards, Tim >>It would be great if we could share >>experiences with the GNU Classpath VM interface in such a way that the >>Harmony interface was suitable for the widest variety of VMs and class >>libraries. >> >>Regards, >>Tim >> >>-- >> >>Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >>IBM Java technology centre, UK. >> >> > > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
