|[3 earlier articles]|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (Charles E. Bortle, Jr.) (2000-02-22)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (2000-02-22)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (2000-02-23)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (Stephen Sulzer) (2000-02-23)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (Juergen Kahrs) (2000-02-23)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (Daniel C. Wang) (2000-02-27)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (2000-02-27)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (Srineet) (2000-02-27)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (Franck Pissotte) (2000-02-28)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (2000-03-06)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (2000-03-06)|
|Re: Compiler project needed firstname.lastname@example.org (Peter Wilson) (2000-03-06)|
|Re: Compiler project needed email@example.com (2000-03-06)|
|[1 later articles]|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (David Starner)|
|Date:||27 Feb 2000 02:35:00 -0500|
|Organization:||Oklahoma State University|
On 23 Feb 2000 14:09:30 -0500,
David S Cargo <email@example.com> wrote:
>operating systems. For example, look at the languages tcl/tk, perl,
>python, Squeak Smalltalk, Icon, and of course C. Now all of these
>languages are multiplatform. Now, how could you arrange for some or
>all of these to use a common runtime system so that each system
>doesn't need to create and maintain its own unique runtime?
(They'll still have to keep a small runtime system around to make the
common runtime correspond to the interface the language demands.
Taking that as irrelevant detail . . .)
For the part for which a common runtime system is feasible, they share
libc. To Posix systems, they can share stuff like Posix threads. I can
see the Boehm-Weiser garbage collector becoming more of a common
runtime component as time goes on.
But the places where they don't share a common runtime system, it's
usually because the interfaces are too different. The people working
on GCC are having problems interfacing exceptions between C, C++ and
Java. Different programming languages have vastly different threading
models. And you end up either adding coroutines just for Icon, adding
bloat for most people, or end up emulating them with threads or
something, for a loss in performance.
It would probably be nice if the common runtime was a little more
standardized among platforms, and not so C-centric. But the common
runtime _has_ developed to fill a lot of the places where it would be
useful, and (since it's a pragmatic thing) not intruded on places
where it would merely be an intruder.
David Starner - firstname.lastname@example.org
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.