Subject:
|
Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 May 1999 20:56:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1057 times
|
| |
|
|
John A. Tamplin <jat@liveonthenet.com> wrote:
> If you really want to design a new bytecode that is completely flexible,
> I suggest using the millions of manhours put into the Java Virtual Machine
> would be worthwhile. I looked at the idea of porting JVM to the RCX
> briefly before, but decided it would be too much work for me. If there
> were a large number of competent programmers working on it, it might be
> doable.
My thoughts on the JVM:
- too complicated for what we need or want
- no direct support for interfacing with the RCX
I envision the new byte code being specific to the RCX, and as simple as
possible to get the job done, which is the exact opposite of the JVM in
those regards.
-Kekoa
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) I guess that depends on who you talk to. Personally, I want an object oriented language with multithreading support. I want to be able to write generic code that can be reused in multiple applications (ie, here is a module that follows a line, (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) Thank you. Kekoa. I was starting to think I was completely alone in my attitudes. Just a couple of comments on what I think a new byte code should do or be 1) It should resemble machine language. The commands in the bytecode should be (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) I say Java is the way to go, actually I am planning to do a JVM for the RCX. The JVM is not necessarily complex, It is possible to do a subset, SUN already does that with the JavaCard specification (that is Java running on smartcards). This (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) If you really want to design a new bytecode that is completely flexible, I suggest using the millions of manhours put into the Java Virtual Machine would be worthwhile. I looked at the idea of porting JVM to the RCX briefly before, but decided (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
67 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
