Hi,
On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 12:19 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
> 2) Pity for those who have to write the AWT libraries.
:) We can confirm that is a lot of hard work. Especially if you want to
be compatible with all the quirks (bugs?) in other AWT implementations.
An interesting experiment in this ar
6) Will generics be truly in the .class files and not just a compiler
hack? (I assume we can extend that to many of the compiler hacks. Hard
to see the advantage as even if the generics are in there, we wouldn't
be able to change things to let you use reflection on generics,
varargs etc).
Then it w
Tom Tromey wrote:
Some of the tasks here involve ways to better integrate the class
libraries with other free software projects:
http://www.peakpeak.com/~tromey/free-java.html
I think adding OSGi implementations to that list would make sense too.
I think the idea of a configurable, modular VM so
> "Henri" == Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Henri> 1) Use Parrot.
LLVM is probably a better choice, if it comes to that.
But looking at execution engines is probably premature.
Henri> 5) Have Sun open-source things to Harmony, or IBM.
Would be nice.
Henri> 6) Will generics be tr
Things from Slashdot that seem of interest:
1) Use Parrot.
2) Pity for those who have to write the AWT libraries.
3) Use JamVM. (It's GPL).
4) Harmony was a project to GPL QT (http://www.kde.org/whatiskde/qt.php).
5) Have Sun open-source things to Harmony, or IBM.
Otherwise, mostly positive state
