 | | Re: interest in JVM porting effort —John A. Tamplin
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: interest in JVM porting effort —Eric Lind
| | | | | I was merely ruminating on packages that might provide interesting interfaces/classes, and packages that we can toss out of hand. I wasn't trying to imply (although my post did seem that way) that we should implement ALL of java.io, just that parts (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: interest in JVM porting effort —John A. Tamplin
| | | | | (...) Ok, that sounds reasonable. 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?: (URL) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | |
