From 97ef5d15ef5e44806b92da486c5f06311db14727 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:01:24 +0200 Subject: user/jkoenig/java: Integrate most of the action items from the discussion page. --- user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn | 108 -------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 108 deletions(-) (limited to 'user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn') diff --git a/user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn b/user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn index 0131d8d5..266a7bcc 100644 --- a/user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn +++ b/user/jkoenig/java/discussion.mdwn @@ -56,114 +56,6 @@ one person's summer.) Such bits could be moved to [[open_issues]] pages, either new ones or existing ones, as applicable. -# POSIX Threads Signal Semantics - - * Great! [[tschwinge]] had a brief look, and should have a deeper one. - - * If [[jkoenig]] thinks it's mature enough: should ask Samuel to test this - (that is, only the refactoring patches for starters?) on the buildds. - - * Then: should ask Roland to review. - - * Documentations bits should probably be moved to [[glibc/signal]]. - - -## libthreads (cthreads) Integration - - * [[tschwinge]] suggests to leave them as-is? - - -## [[libpthread]] integration - - * To be done. - - -# Java - - * [[tschwinge]] has to read about RMI and CORBA. - - -# Joe-E - - * For later. - - -# GCJ - - * [[tschwinge]] has the feeling that Java in GCC (that is, GCJ) is mostly - dead? (True?) - - * Thus perhaps not too much effort should be spent with it. - - If the POSIX threads signal semantics makes it going, then great, otherwise - we should get a feeling what else is missing. - - -# OpenJDK - - * All in all, [[tschwinge]] has the feeling that a working OpenJDK will be - more useful/powerful than GCJ. - - * We need to get a feeling how difficult such an OS port will be. - - * [[jkoenig]] suggests OpenJDK 6 -- should we directly go for version 7 - instead? - - * What are the differences (regarding the OS port) between the two - versions? Or this there something even more recent to be worked upon, - for new OS ports? - - * Perhaps the different versions' OS port specific stuff is not at - all very different, so that both v6 and v7 could be done? - - * They seem to have a rather heavy-weight process for such projects: confer - , - for example. Do we need this, too? - - -# Eclipse - -OK for testing -- but I'd very much hope that it *just works* as soon as we -provide the required Java platform. - - -# Java Bindings - - -## Design Principles - - * Generally ack. - - -### MIG - - * Hacking [[microkernel/mach/MIG]] shouldn't be too difficult. - - * (Unless you want to make MIG's own code (that is, not the generated - code, but MIG itself) look a bit more nice, too.) ;-) - - * There are also alternatives to MIG. If there is interest, the following - could be considered: - - * FLICK ([[!GNU_Savannah_task 5723]]). [[tschwinge]] has no idea yet if - there would be any benefits over MIG, like better modularity (for the - backends)? If we feel like it, we could spend a little bit of time on - this. - - * For [[microkernel/Viengoos]], Neal has written a RPC stub generator - entirely in C Preprocessor macros. While this is obviously not - directly applicable, perhaps we can get some ideas from it. - - * Anything else that would be worth having a look at? (What are other - microkernels using?) - - -### `mach_msg` - - * Seems like the right approach to [[tschwinge]], but hasn't digested all the - pecularities yet. Will definitely need more time. - - # GSoC Site Discussion * Discussion items from -- cgit v1.2.3