From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 107f24,6f568a2e6507575 X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public X-Google-Thread: f891f,6f568a2e6507575 X-Google-Attributes: gidf891f,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f568a2e6507575 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-30 01:31:17 PST Path: newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!skynet.be!newsfeed1.news.nl.uu.net!sun4nl!lnewspeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewsifeed01.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewspost00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3AED22D3.FE9FAF9B@siroyan.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:31:15 +0100 From: Jon Beniston Organization: Siroyan, Ltd. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Thoughts and Opinions or something like that References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: hide.siroyan.com X-Trace: 988619475 reading.news.pipex.net 15031 193.128.60.177 X-Complaints-To: abuse@uk.uu.net Xref: newsfeed.google.com comp.lang.ada:7040 comp.lang.functional:5391 comp.lang.misc:1193 Date: 2001-04-30T09:31:15+01:00 List-Id: "chris.danx" wrote: > "brian hiles" wrote in message > news:teje2rsjqeak2e@corp.supernews.com... > > In comp.lang.misc chris.danx wrote: > > > Someone on these news groups suggested to someone that in order to make a > > > reliable Virtual Machines, they needed the opinions of many programmers... > > > > By VM do you mean the _Java_ virtual machine, bu which many language > > authors are writing languages to produce jvm bytecodes, > > JVM sucks IMO. It's not that i hate Java it's just it's machine is not well > planned or thought out, again IMO. > So, in your opinion, what's wrong with it? How could it be improved? JonB > > > or _another_ > > VM for in which case it seems you are "reinventing the wheel"? > > I'm not reinventing the wheel, and anyway what's wrong with that? Earths > history is full of people developing things and reworking things TO MAKE THEM > BETTER FOR SPECIFIC JOBS. > > Nuff said... > > > For both cases, the best use of one's effort is the time spent reviewing > > the field for other programmers projects: > > > > http://grunge.cs.tu-berlin.de/~tolk/vmlanguages.html > > > > A fascinating site! > > Really, i looked and thought "hmm, put my language on JVM, why didn't i think of > that before?". It's been weighed up against others ages ago, it was found to > support features that didn't work with the language goals. I'd have to get > really stuck into the VM and figure out how to make the program work with alien > concepts. The point of making a language unspecific VM (the RISC machine) is to > make experimentation easier. The point of making a language specific VM is to > improve efficiency, and make the compiler simpler. Also it fit's into the > concept of interactive programming. Since any code block can (in theory) be run > on the VM and be examined as it's running, it's easier to test code. If i was > to do this with the native architecture it'd be more difficult, and more > dangerous. The VM simplifies the testing by providing the ability to watch > what's going on and halting it, changing the code, then resuming and seeing > what's going on now. > > JVM might have garbage collection, but it's not been designed to work with tail > recursion, carry through unit binding, set expression, lists and what not. > These will make my life easier, and hopefully an intelligent and well designed > implementation will make them efficient and speedy. > > > > > =Brian