[Coco] [Color Computer] Java for the m6809

[James Diffendaffer]

--- In ColorComputer at yahoogroups.com, "John W. Linville"
<linville at ...> wrote:
 
> So you read (at least part) of it...  Yet despite the fact that they
> never claimed otherwise, you go on and on about how you can't write
> 'real' programs with it.  What is so offensive to you about it?

I never said you can't write 'real' programs with it. 
You can't use existing Java code with it (it has NONE of the normal
Java APIs).
You wouldn't be able to write ANY programs for the coco with it as is.
The amount of effort required to do anything on the coco with it is
pretty significant.

> > Everything I said is true
> 
> True?  Perhaps.  Irrelevant?  Definitely.

Says you.  Please... feel free to write a program for the CoCo on it.

> Thanks so much for the recap on Java.  It gets so little coverage in
> mainstream computer science circles!

Too bad you didn't seem to read any of it.

> More irrelevance.  You are the only one pushing the assumption that
> it has to run 'portable' Java to be interesting.

Trying to write a Java program for what is there would be pretty
frustrating at best.  I don't think that would be irrelevant. 
 
> Oh yes, the DECB GCC port is sooooo useful...

Funny, at least I've compiled some CoCo software with it that actually
runs.  I have a Z machine adventure interpreter that has everything
working but the I/O which I've never had time to write library
routines for. 

> > You obviously don't even know enough about it to comment and you want
> > to jump all over me for pointing out obvious flaws with the project.
> 
> *smirk*
> 
> Perhaps you should check the archives and re-evaluate who "jumped
> all over" whom.

Oh really?  This was my first post on the topic:
"Interesting but java doesn't have to page RAM and 64K isn't going to
be enough"

That's not jumping all over you.

And yours:
"I think you missed the point of the project..."

I missed nothing and you read way more emotion into my post than was
there because you chose to.
How dare I disagree with you.

> No, you can't.  But if you pull your ears out past your sphincter

And yet you have to stoop to insults.

> you might recognize it for what it is -- a cool little project.

I said it's interesting in my first post.  
Again... it's not very useful.  

FWIW, converting byte codes is just a matter of reading a byte code
and spitting out a sequence of instructions to duplicate it.  It's
more time consuming than complex.  Way easier than a full compiler.

BTW, Java doesn't use registers, everything is on the stack so it's
using stack index pointers a lot.  That's much slower than registers
so it would be significantly larger and slower than C unless you
optimized the code a lot... but at least it's possible on the 6809.

I'd hate to have to implement that on the 6502.  A C compiler on the
6502 is ugly and C is only partially stack based.  The 6502 only has
an 8 bit stack pointer, 8 bit pointer registers and to get around that
you have to use page 0.  Now try a language centered around the
stack... that would be a nightmare.  Come to think of it, it would
result in pretty slow code on the Z80 too but at least it would be
better than the 6502.