[M3devel] Think we need a new release. C target

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi all:
Thankfully some theoretical work towards unifying JavaScript Object model to the one of Obliq (did some work on that), and some of the harder work has been done in optimization (Google V8, Safari, etc) and JS VM has been written in JavaScript, then I still don't get why we can't if both theoretically and practically has been done.
I have studied in some form the JVM and I can say very clearly that it's a CISC architecture, I don't see too much of the object model in it bundled (like Uniform treatment of Integer, Scalar types and just the fact that vectorial types are like so, makes conclude that).
Thanks in advance

--- El dom, 19/2/12, Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop> escribió:

> De: Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] Think we need a new release. C target
> Para: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> Fecha: domingo, 19 de febrero, 2012 13:18
> 
> 
> On 02/17/2012 05:29 AM, Dragiša Durić wrote:
> > To port to JVM or Javascript, you have to throw through
> the window a lot of what Modula-3 is. You will get, in best
> case, part of Modula-3.
> >
> 
> Once, I was peripherally involved in a project that was
> planning to translate
> Ada to JVM code.  After a bit of design work, they
> quickly abandoned that idea.
> 
> Java reflects the popular procrustean philosophy that
> object-oriented constructs
> should be almost the only tool in your box.  As a
> result, the set of non-heap-allocated
> types is highly impoverished, with no programmer-defined
> type constructors at all.
> This is reflected in the JVM.  It doesn't have the
> constructs to support the richer
> type system of Ada or Modula-3.  At the very least,
> some other bytecode design
> would be needed.
> 
> > On the other side, targeting to C (or C++) and losing
> object model from sight (while debugging), ie losing or
> distorting, also looks like an horrible side effect to me.
> >
> > It looks like the best direction to concentrate effort
> is current GCC (a lot of platforms) and LLVM ((almost) new
> kid on the block with many good promises). The best thing
> about LLVM target is - IM is standardized and fully
> documented. Since we all know what pain is tagging along
> behind GCC IM (thanks to RMS losing licensing battle to
> SRC), LLVM looks like a promise of future freedom for
> Modula-3. Maye some day we will not be traumatized by every
> major (and most minor) GCC releases.
> >
> > BTW, freepascal has it's own backend infrastructure.
> Maybe worth a try.
> >
> > dd
> >
> >
> > On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:57 PM, Daniel Alejandro Benavides
> D. wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all:
> >> The point is whether we want to migrate our current
> RT to C or JavaScript, my question is why not (Java/) JVM or
> Obliq.
> >>
> >
>