|UNCOL in the news again (again) firstname.lastname@example.org (1997-04-07)|
|Re: UNCOL in the news again (again) email@example.com (1997-04-08)|
|Re: UNCOL in the news again (again) firstname.lastname@example.org (1997-04-13)|
|From:||email@example.com (Tom Lane)|
|Date:||8 Apr 1997 09:38:59 -0400|
|Organization:||Netcom Online Communications Services|
firstname.lastname@example.org (David Keppel) writes:
> (UVMs). Working with researchers at Taligent, IBM is developing a
> single virtual machine capable of running applications written in C++,
> Smalltalk or Java,
> [I predict they'll all soon be crying "UNCOL" -Pardo]
> [Throw in Lisp and Cobol and you'll really have something. -John]
If their definition of "universal" is "it supports C++ and Java", it's
probably doable. The UNCOL advocates of previous decades had much
more ambitious goals than supporting near-workalike languages...
Throwing in Smalltalk makes the problem at least moderately
interesting, but I bet that requirement will get dumped before long.
regards, tom lane
[Even C++ and Java will be difficult due to the rather different storage
models. Look at TDF/ANDF -- as far as I can tell they ground to a halt
before they'd finished adding C++ to the original C. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.