scopes writeup

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

Hi Samuel,
the point you raise has nothing to do with the scope discussion. Please 
kindly consider moving it to a separate thread.

Cheers
Maurizio

On 30/01/2019 02:21, Samuel Audet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to hear more about what John mentions below about being 
> "challenging enough" and leaving work for the future. I would go one 
> step further. The Substrate VM team already has something working as 
> part of their C interface, and they did not need to parse anything to 
> get it working. It does not try to do as much as Panama, but they did 
> what is in my opinion most important: A simpler more efficient variant 
> of JNI. If we could get this bit of Panama stabilized first, instead 
> of trying to parse everything, that would be great I think. What do 
> you think? Or if that is not possible, how is Panama different from 
> Substrate VM such that the same approach would not work?
>
> I am starting the get the impression that Panama is basically 
> reimplementing portions of LLVM in Java as part of SystemABI. How much 
> effort would it take to, for example, implement the required subset of 
> the Java ABI in LLVM? Doing it that way, we would not need to test the 
> C/C++ ABI, at least, making it possible instead to reuse tests from 
> the JDK itself, or am I talking nonsense here? Looks like that might 
> be challenging as well: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/8189173. In any 
> case, it would be great if we could have a discussion about these 
> things instead of having OpenJDK dictate everything!
>
> Samuel
>
> On 1/30/19 5:03 AM, John Rose wrote:
>> Currently we are focusing on accurately extracting all possible
>> raw APIs, and providing efficient access to them.  This is
>> challenging enough for now.  So you won't see much help
>> for civilizing yet.  I expect that folks will start to experiment
>> with civilizing layers when the raw extraction mechanisms
>> stabilize.