[MUD-Dev] Re: DevMUD considerations and the Halloween article

[Chris Gray]

[Marc Hernandez:]

 >	There are 2 versions of 'free' JVMs around (Kaffe and Japhar).
 >Just looking at Japhar (http://www.japhar.org) it is LGPL'd, which is
 >quite attractive.

Nod. Kaffe is what I have here on Linux. One of my concerns with using
the JVM is that it might be considerable work to change the machine in
any significant way. E.g. the strong dependency on the constant table.
Also the use of the Java object model - if we end up wanting a different
one for DevMUD, how hard would that be?

The source file for my bytecode interpreter is about 1500 lines, and
I'm the world's expert on it :-) So, its fairly easy to change how it
works. It also comes with *no* strings attached.

There are lots of advantages to jumping onto the Java bandwagon in this
respect (its not going to go away soon!), and I'm not against it for the
main DevMUD stream. I'm just offering my stuff, since if I end up using
the DevMUD framework to replace my own, I'll want my stuff since, by its
nature, it is faster than equivalent Java stuff (unless you have JIT).
No need for details - its mostly a personal thing.

--
Don't design inefficiency in - it'll happen in the implementation. - me

Chris Gray     cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA