JEP draft

[Mike Hearn]

Nice to see!

Presumably the concrete goal will be to nail down an ABI between compiled
code and the HotSpot runtime services? The compiler independence of the
goals is quite interesting. In theory if there's a precise ABI for
accessing runtime services like the GC, reflection, deoptimization, TLS
etc, then you could write a new non-Java language that compiles to native
code ahead of time using some pre-existing compiler infrastructure (e.g.
.NET?), which then uses HotSpot almost as a normal language runtime
library. Minimal Java code would be executed in this model and you could
theoretically even use LTO to get rid of the bits of the JVM you aren't
using. So if you wanted to make a new GCd language but wanted to skip
bytecode and Truffle then you could do so, with a Leyden of that form.

Or is the idea to go in some other direction?

On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 04:41, Julian Waters <tanksherman27 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> A JEP draft regarding Leyden has been submitted at
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8313278. Feedback is welcome
>
> best regards,
> Julian
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/leyden-dev/attachments/20230728/f97448e7/attachment.htm>