[Mono-list] Re: could mono become a hybrid cil/java platform?
Freddy BL
freddy_bl@hotmail.com
Tue, 28 May 2002 10:59:34 +0000
Hi Norbert!
>i'm a java programmer, and just read about your 'Java to IL
>Compiler'-project. at one point it says, that java-bytecode is a
>subset of cil-bytecode.
Yes, thats right. If you look at Java-Assemblercode and IL-Code it looks at
first like the same. Only the names of the Assembler-commands are diffeent.
This Java-Program loads to integer variables and store the result in an
third variable:
iload_1
iload_2
iadd
istore_3
The same in MS-IL:
ldloc.1
ldloc.2
add
stloc.3
So, at first it seams to be easy to translate:
iload_x -> ldloc.x
istore_x -> stloc.x
iadd -> add
return -> ret
aload_0 -> ldarg.0
(Btw: More you can find under
http://www.it-c.dk/courses/PFOO/F2002/notes10.txt)
>would it be hard to make the mono-jit a hybrid platform which runs both
>cil-bytecode and java classfiles (without prior
>java-bytecode to cil translation)?
I think its to hard, and it support not the philosophy behind Mono.
Mono want to have a platform, on which different languages can be translatet
and not to have a platform which starts different Assembler-code.
>if you put so much energy into creating a fast JIT, why not use it for java
>as well?
Why should the Mono-programme do this?
There existing a lot of JVM:
Suns real JVM, the Blackdown-port, IBMs Java, etc.
And as Open-Source alternatives there existing Kaffe, Japhar, Kissme,
ElectricalFends (or how the JVM of the Mozilla-project is called), etc.
>... instead of migrating software from java to cil, rather melt the
>two technologies together (with some kind of bridge in between - i
>guess that class-libraries still have to stay separate)... maybe
>this would also reduce the 'cost' of creating language bindings to
>gtk and gnome for both languages (like gtk# / java-gnome)...
No, Mono _reduce_ this costs.
You must only create bindings for Mono and all IL-code-programs can use it.
An other point is, that I think, that the native-code-interfaces between
Mono and Java are different.
The idea of Mono is, to have only _one_ VM, on which all can run. And if
there existing a binary-converter from Java-.class to IL and if there
existing something like J-Sharp on Mono, you can write programs in Java,
which than can run on Mono.
You do not need two bindings (like your example: GTK-Sharp _and_
Java-Gnome). You need only _one_ of it (GTK-Sharp).
Thats the idea of .NET and Mono.
An other point is, that there are no people, who use OpenSource-JVMs. They
all prefer Suns original.
But for Unix there don´t exist a .NET-Framework. So it is possible, that in
the future Mono is the standard .NET for unixes.
>but i don't know if this makes sense from a technical point of
>view... ;-)
No, it don´t make sense.
Greatings
Freddy BL
_________________________________________________________________
Senden und empfangen Sie Hotmail über Ihr Mobilgerät: http://mobile.msn.com