Subject:
|
Re: interest in JVM porting effort
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 May 1999 16:47:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1185 times
|
| |
|
|
Aaah, good points. Do we have a preliminary list of packages that we'll need?
Actually, it's easier to pick things that aren't needed and then complement
it. java.awt is right out, as is java.applet. The same thing can be said for
java.beans, java.sql, java.txt, java.math, java.util, java.security, and all of
the javax's. java.rmi could prove useful, although probably overkill for the
RCX, and java.net might be nice later on, but, again, not needed now. This
leaves us with java.lang (and some of its subpackages) and java.io. That seems
considerably less daunting than what I first thought. Of course, we can pick
and choose the actual classes and interfaces from these packages.
In lugnet.robotics, lego-robotics@crynwr.com (John A. Tamplin) writes:
> On Fri, 7 May 1999, Eric Lind wrote:
>
> > This sounds reasonable. I imagine we'll be using the EmbeddedJava API for
> > this, as this allows us to implement only the parts of Java we need or can
> > support in the RCX. I'm a bit disappointed with the minimal info that
> > java.sun.com provides on what the EmbeddedJava API is. I mean, it says that
> > java.awt.applet is unsupported, everything else is configurable, with
> > configurable being (by my interpretation) "pick and choose for your • platform".
>
> Actually, we can't do EmbeddedJava since that requires a full JVM including
> long and double, the Security manager, etc. We aren't going to be able to
> call it Java, since it won't pass the compatibility suite (we can say it
> implements a subset of the Java Virtual Machine).
>
> As far as the classes, we will certainly need most of java.lang and some of
> the other packages, and then of course our own set of packages for
> RCX-specific stuff.
>
> > We'll likely need to use LegOS as our base, as actually implementing a • native
> > Java machine is, sorry to say, beyond most.
>
> Eventually, we will need to either redo the thread scheduler or write our
> own.
>
> John A. Tamplin Traveller Information • Services
> jat@LiveOnTheNet.COM 2104 West Ferry Way
> 256/705-7007 - FAX 256/705-7100 Huntsville, AL 35801
>
> --
> Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: interest in JVM porting effort
|
| (...) Actually, there are some things in java.math that should be there. I would expect we would have two sets of classes -- those which are built into the JVM port (ie, those required for operation like Object, Thread, etc) and those which can be (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: interest in JVM porting effort
|
| (...) Actually, we can't do EmbeddedJava since that requires a full JVM including long and double, the Security manager, etc. We aren't going to be able to call it Java, since it won't pass the compatibility suite (we can say it implements a subset (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
