On Jun 6, 2005, at 10:03 AM, Ahmed Saad wrote:
On 6/6/05, Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason being that their customers do not
want to be exposed to differences between rt.jar and GNU Classpath.
oh well aren't both implemented according to a well-designed exported
API. So
On Jun 6, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Peter Donald wrote:
I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is hoped
there will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but continue to
use Suns class library so that differences in libraries don't hurt
their customers.
If
On 6/7/05, Archie Cobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
[..]
Because it's possible that Sun finds this aspect of Harmony valuable
overall, and contributes information to help shape this.
I highly doubt that will happen (just my opinion though).
Secondly, you can no
On Jun 7, 2005, at 9:49 AM, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is hoped
there will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but continue
to use Suns class library so that differences in libraries
don't hurt their
On Jun 7, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is
hoped there will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but
continue to use Suns class library so that differences in
libraries don't hurt their
On Jun 7, 2005, at 4:32 PM, Sven de Marothy wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 16:14 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Either one - if here, we can certainly suggest to classpath (and even
provide some code... I'm dying to contribute to something under the
GPL ;)
Geir,
I know you were joking,
On 6/6/05, Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason being that their customers do not
want to be exposed to differences between rt.jar and GNU Classpath.
oh well aren't both implemented according to a well-designed exported
API. So how there would be differences that would hurt the
Peter Donald wrote:
I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is hoped there
will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but continue to use Suns
class library so that differences in libraries don't hurt their customers.
If that is a goal of Harmony then we've just made things a
Hi,
Ahmed Saad wrote:
oh well aren't both implemented according to a well-designed exported
API. So how there would be differences that would hurt the clients of
this API (assuming that the GUN Classpath got completed and they are
both might be retrofitted to be easily installed in this
Hi,
It seems like there is a little bit of heat being generated by this
topic due to confusion. While Geir has not actually stated this anywhere
I assume that the reason that he is advocating for a VM interface that
is independent of GNU Classpath is because he has plans to interoperate
with
One potential use is for companies (and individuals) to work around
particular performance limitations and bugs in the Sun VM while
keeping the libraries they know inside and out. I imagine that could
become common if Harmony ends up being as modular as we all hope.
I am curious as to how
On Jun 5, 2005, at 9:32 PM, Peter Donald wrote:
Hi,
It seems like there is a little bit of heat being generated by this
topic due to confusion. While Geir has not actually stated this
anywhere I assume that the reason that he is advocating for a VM
interface that is independent of GNU
On Jun 5, 2005, at 10:06 PM, Craig Blake wrote:
One potential use is for companies (and individuals) to work around
particular performance limitations and bugs in the Sun VM while
keeping the libraries they know inside and out. I imagine that
could become common if Harmony ends up being
13 matches
Mail list logo
