···@best.com (.) writes:
{lots of stuff deleted}
> On the other hand, don't bet that if the JavaVM fails to become widely
> accepted, something better will replace it. If JavaVM doesn't catch
> on, what will replace it is likely some scripting language like
> VisualBasic, and either ActiveX or Omniware. If you want a
> standardized dynamic runtime this millenium (:-), working with the
> JavaVM and cooperating on its evolution seems to be the best chance.
I've actually been thinking about an idealized VM that address some of these
issues as part of a senior thesis. Not that this is the greatest piece of
writen prose in the world, but some of the issues it covers might be of
interest.
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/usr/dw3u/sthesis-outline.ps
Bell Labs' Inferno sounds like it could be a workable platform too
http://inferno.bell-labs.com/inferno
In article <··················@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Daniel C. Wang" <·····@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>> ···@best.com (.) writes:
>> {lots of stuff deleted}
>> > On the other hand, don't bet that if the JavaVM fails to become widely
>> > accepted, something better will replace it. If JavaVM doesn't catch
>> > on, what will replace it is likely some scripting language like
>> > VisualBasic, and either ActiveX or Omniware. If you want a
>> > standardized dynamic runtime this millenium (:-), working with the
>> > JavaVM and cooperating on its evolution seems to be the best chance.
It will be hard to combat a multi-million-dollar marketing effort,
but it's all the harder if there isn't a technically good alternative,
which seems the current case, or at least nobody seriously
supporting an alternative.
There is an existing VM already in widespread use for many years: EMACS.
Already has an byte-code compiler and interpreter and a large existing
base of developed programs. If it wasn't GNU'd and therefore of little
value to invest in, it could easily replace the JAVA-VM.
-Kelly Murray ···@franz.com