On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 21:21 +0200, Niklas Klügel wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > Consider: > > > > 1. The measured performance of the best JVM sucks. 2. There is no > > possibility of hard real-time in a garbage-collected runtime. 3. > > The amount of code needed to implement a decent JVM (or similar > > system) is approximately 10x the amount of code needed to implement > > a protected microkernel. > > > that was not my point. it was an example that software-based > memory protection is already practicable at acceptable costs.
Perhaps acceptable costs to you, but not at acceptable robustness or acceptable performance, or acceptable memory footprint for most applications. I approve of safe programming languages (which doesn't necessarily require a JVM). I just think that they aren't a complete solution by themselves. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
