[kaffe] pure java vs. native implementations

[Stuart Ballard]

Dalibor Topic wrote:
> 
> Yeah, that sounds good. Something like
> --with-pure-java=PACKAGE,... as in
> --with-pure-java=java.math,java.util.zip should be
> easy. I could add a pure-java directory in
> libraries/javalib and set java_math_SRCS and
> java_util_zip_SRCS conditionally. What do you think ?

How about a warning if you're using pure-java things with the intrp engine?

Also, assuming we would probably want to default to pure-java for most 
things, would --without-pure-java=java.math be possible to only switch 
*off* one package compared to the default?

Also, "all" should be a valid value (for both with and without), if at 
all possible.

Then I guess make the default be --with-pure-java=all for jit mode, and 
--without-pure-java=all for intrp mode.

> Yeah, but it would require some kind of generic
> Service Provider Interface for packages/classes (as
> all implementations would be in the same namespace),
> and I doubt that's worth it. I'd also assume that most
> people would use a single implementation all the time.

It would also defeat the purpose of having higher-performance native 
implementations by wrapping them in a slower java wrapper, wouldn't it?

Stuart.


-- 
Stuart Ballard, Programmer
NetReach - Internet Solutions
(215) 283-2300, ext. 126
http://www.netreach.com/