From: Samuele P. <ped...@st...> - 2005-06-03 12:00:11
|
Brian Zimmer wrote: > > On Jun 2, 2005, at 08:09 PM, Randy Brown wrote: > >> Niall Murphy wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> I am interested in improving the existing jythonc tool. >>> is their somebody currently working on this? >> >> >> I recently just got back into looking at this. > > > Excellent. I haven't had any time to look at this functionality. > >> >>> Why does convert to a java file and then run javac? >>> is this simpler than going straight to Java byte code? >> >> >> From what I've heard and seen in the code, this appears to be the >> start of a more ambitious compiler structure (think shades of pypy) >> that got to a working stage but didn't really get much further off the >> ground. >> > > That's more than I know. > >>> any information on the structure of jythonc and the parser would be >>> welcome. >> >> >> Right now, AFAIK nobody's really looking at the existing jythonc code >> because nobody sees how its existing structure could be made >> to support generators. My current take is to try to adapt the existing >> code in jython so that it can do what jythonc used to: >> >> * Make new java classes with signatures >> * I have code for normal methods; constructors are harder. >> * Do ahead-of-time compilation so that most jython code can run: >> * In cases where java classes are expected (e.g. servlets & beans) >> * Without the permission to use a special classloader (applets) >> * I've been looking into this; it's not that hard to modify >> the existing proxy behavior to work with precompiled classes. >> >> > > > This would be my approach as well. I've also looked at the code and > think it's doable. I'd very much like to see the two implementations > collapsed into one. If you're serious about working on this let's > coordinate efforts. I think this would be a big one from a > maintenance perspective as well as the obvious ability to bring > jythonc inline with jython. > indeed this would be a very reasonable plan forward. regards, Samuele |