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

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi all:
in the other way Jay has proposed could be realized nicely with M3CG to extend CLEF compiler to do that, making type inference explicit could aid the JVM smartly check the IL to avoid gcc IR step and add extended static checking on it, to check for lower level RT errors in case it's necessary to. For instance check integer overflows, etc.
Thanks in advance 

--- El dom, 19/2/12, Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es> escribió:

> De: Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] Think we need a new release. C target
> Para: m3devel at elegosoft.com, "Rodney M. Bates" <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>
> Fecha: domingo, 19 de febrero, 2012 13:43
> 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.
> > >>
> > >
> >
>