[Coco] [Color Computer] Java for the m6809

[chargeron]

Nice to forgive John now all is well...?
cool entertainment....
Ron
looking foward to the next email...




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John W. Linville 
  To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts 
  Cc: ColorComputer at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 7:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [Coco] [Color Computer] Java for the m6809


  On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 12:29:52AM -0000, James Diffendaffer wrote:
  > --- In ColorComputer at yahoogroups.com, "John W. Linville"
  > <linville at ...> wrote:
  > >
  > > Did you read the paper at all? Or could you not be bothered?
  > 
  > What, the document file that says it only implements a subset of Java
  > and the "os" only has a handful of functions you can use?

  So you read (at least part) of it... Yet despite the fact that they
  never claimed otherwise, you go on and on about how you can't write
  'real' programs with it. What is so offensive to you about it?

  > Everything I said is true

  True? Perhaps. Irrelevant? Definitely.

  > and without some sort of native API it's not
  > much use unless all you want to do is simple prints and file I/O which
  > isn't even CoCo compatible. At least with C you can directly
  > implement hardware I/O without having to create a native API in
  > assembly. EVERYTHING you access on an individual system has to be
  > done with a native API when you program in Java. Java does not allow
  > direct access to memory so you have to write that in assembly or C.

  Thanks so much for the recap on Java. It gets so little coverage in
  mainstream computer science circles!

  > > If you only care about practical computing, why on earth are you
  > > reading this list?
  > 
  > Look... you even admit you aren't a Java person, but I am. It's not
  > even practical for impractical computing like the CoCo.
  > The whole portability aspect of Java (probably it's biggest selling
  > point) is non-existent. This doesn't even support a full enough
  > implementation to run as much as that Java ring that was given away at
  > trade shows.

  More irrelevance. You are the only one pushing the assumption that
  it has to run 'portable' Java to be interesting.

  > Now, if it supported a full implementation of Java SE it might be
  > usable but as is you really can't do much with it and certainly not
  > for the coco. Definitely not as much as GCC.

  Oh yes, the DECB GCC port is sooooo useful...

  > To be honest, GCC has supported compiling Java to native code for
  > years as long as the target code generator was written to work with
  > the entire compiler suite. If the 6809 code generator for GCC does
  > that then I'm sure it would offer a much more complete implementation. 
  > 
  > I should also point out that Java code generated by a byte code
  > compiler is going to be less efficient than that of a direct native
  > compiler because it expects to be run on a bytecode interpreter. Some
  > bytecode operations are illegal because they would step outside the
  > sandbox created for the Java application for security purposes. If
  > you are compiling a native executable you don't need to worry about
  > the sandbox security and you could optimize the code further.
  > 
  > The only reason I can see for taking their approach is because it
  > would be easier to convert bytecodes to assembly than implement a full
  > compiler.

  ...or because it seemed like an interesting project.

  > > So, will you be able to run "Fantastic Java-based Desktop App 2.7"
  > > on your MultiVue desktop? Of course not. So what?
  > > Might you be able to write something new? Using a modern language and
  > > development tools? To ultimately run something on your coco or similar
  > > hardware? I don't see why not, other than laziness or disinterest...
  > 
  > You obviously don't even know enough about it to comment and you want
  > to jump all over me for pointing out obvious flaws with the project.

  *smirk*

  Perhaps you should check the archives and re-evaluate who "jumped
  all over" whom.

  > You aren't going to be able to write games with it, you can't write
  > business applications with it, and you can't even write the simplest
  > tools with it the way it is. 

  No, you can't. But if you pull your ears out past your sphincter
  you might recognize it for what it is -- a cool little project.

  > > Is your reflexive pessimism helpful to the group? No.
  > 
  > Reflexive pessimism? Oh, that makes an expert now doesn't it.
  > At least know what you are talking about before jumping on someone
  > that actually does!
  > Is your uninformed ranting useful to the group? No.

  Again, you need to check the archives. I posted a link to a cool
  little project which combined a little modern-ish technology with
  our favorite 8-bit CPU, and you went ballistic.

  Don't worry, I forgive you. :-) We all have a bad day now and then.
  I'll assume this was one for you.

  John
  -- 
  John W. Linville
  linville at tuxdriver.com


   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.8/1339 - Release Date: 3/22/2008 4:43 PM