RE: Re-2: [ObjectWeb architecture] just an idea for (Java) native compilation

["Christophe Ney" <christophe.ney@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We have endless manpower. It is just a matter of finding
people who are interested in joining forces.
christophe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 12:17 PM
> To: architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re-2: [ObjectWeb architecture] just an idea for (Java) native
> compilation
> 
> 
> Oh, now I understand. So is the OCaml compiled native code 
> faster than the code from other compilers, e. g. from GCJ? Do 
> you have benchmarks (I'm really interested in getting Java 
> running faster)? For the second point: Sure constructing an 
> ObjectWeb own native java compiler is interesting, but do we 
> have manpower for such a project?
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [ObjectWeb architecture] just an idea for (Java) 
> native compilation (25-Sep-2003 11:08)
> From:    dominique.devito@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To:      markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> > >===== Original Message From <markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx> =====
> > >Maybe I have not quite understood what the benefit of a 
> cross compilation 
> > from Java to OCaml should be. Java is fast already and if I 
> want to make it 
> > 
> > faster, I would prefer native compilation (machine code) 
> instead of OCaml. 
> > Cross compilation
> > 
> > I also focus here native compilation for Java but between 
> the Java code and 
> > 
> > the binary code, I have just talked about an intermediary 
> step : the OCaml 
> > code.
> > 
> > 
> > >between Java and OCaml would weaken the idea of one common 
> Java platform, 
> > since it would degrade Java to one of many possible source 
> languages for 
> > OCaml. But instead, the idea behind Java is that it is the 
> only target 
> > platform itself. So I will not
> > >support this idea.
> > >Also OCaml is seldomly used, while Java is widely spread. 
> So I only see a 
> > benefit for OCaml, not for JOnAS.
> > 
> > No degradation here for my point of view : the OCaml 
> language is used here 
> > as 
> > an intermediary step for Java native compilation. Just as 
> the first C++ 
> > compilers. The C language was used for the intermediary 
> step : C++ -> C -> 
> > native code and this compilation way has not weakened the 
> C++ language and 
> > it 
> > was not for the benefits of C.
> > 
> > Instead of generating OCaml code from the Java code, 
> another way might be 
> > to 
> > reuse&share some parts of the outstanding OCaml compiler in 
> order to build 
> > a 
> > Java compiler.
> > 
> > Just my 2 cents.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Dominique De Vito
> > 
> > 
> > >Have Fun
> > >Markus
> > >
> > >-------- Original Message --------
> > >Subject: [ObjectWeb architecture] just an idea for (Java) native 
> > compilation 
> > (24-Sep-2003 21:56)
> > >From:    dominique.devito@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >To:      markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> This is just an idea for (Java) native compilation.
> > >>
> > >> INRIA has an outstanding knowledge about native compiler 
> technology. To 
> > be
> > >> more precise, INRIA has developped a native compiler for 
> the "Objective
> > >> Caml" language. Caml is a strongly-typed functional 
> programming language
> > >> from the ML family. OCaml (Objective Caml) and Caml 
> Light are two open
> > >> source implementations of Caml developed at INRIA 
> Rocquencourt, projet
> > >> Cristal. See <http://caml.inria.fr/> and 
> <http://caml.inria.fr/ocaml/>.
> > >>
> > >> INRIA has started at January 2001 the Caml consortium (like the 
> > ObjectWeb
> > >> consortium) : the Caml consortium federates the design 
> and development 
> > of
> > >> the Caml language and its programming environment. The 
> Objective Caml (
> > >> OCaml) compiler is released by the Caml Consortium and 
> performs very 
> > well :
> > >> Objective Caml ranks 2nd on speed (between C and C++) on 
> Doug Bagley's
> > >> computer language shootout ! See 
> <http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/>.
> > 
> > >>
> > >> So, why not joining Caml & ObjectWeb consortiums strengths for 
> > developping
> > >> a Java compiler ? One way could/would be to develop a 
> bridge Java->OCaml 
> > as
> > >> OCaml's object-oriented features are similar to Java's 
> object-oriented
> > >> features (Ocaml also includes functional features, 
> module features...).
> > >>
> > >> What do you think about this idea ? Silly idea :-) ? Good idea ?
> > >>
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Dominique
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> To: architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > To: markus.karg@xxxxxxxxx
> >     architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
>