APIs will make JVM porting easier (was Re: the mutant beast (was Re: Backtracking through the source))

--pqw+uiQfrV1nNtFa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

Dan Sugalski <[email protected]> wrote:

> It's more than just the parser. You've got the bytecode compiler and
> possibly the optimizer as well, and they're probably going to be all, or
> mostly, C. On the other hand they might not have any internal hooks for
> perl code to wedge into, in which case they're just black boxes and not of
> much concern.

This is exactly why I have been pushing for the internals APIs to be very
clearly defined.  I expect to have to replace various parts of it with Java
code, so that it will run natively on the JVM.  Anything that must be
present at run-time for Perl code will likely need to be reimplemented in
Java to make a full-fledged JVM port.

> That probably didn't talk you down, did it? :-/

No, but I figured this would be hard, anyway.  As long as it's an order of
magnitude easier than it is to use B:: to port Perl to the JVM, I think I'll
be satisfied.

(And, I should not that simply writing clear, well-defined APIs for all
internal data structures should be enough to reach that goal.)

-- 
Bradley M. Kuhn  -  http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn

--pqw+uiQfrV1nNtFa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE6KYWw53XjJNtBs4cRAn4KAKCDbuVk+p6twNbpKh+B+xmsXtIfQQCeIjtL
Pkv87fFG8ZgOb03MusAi/yk=
=b6LE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pqw+uiQfrV1nNtFa--