On Wednesday 18 May 2005 21:55, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 21:48 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: > > It's been said before that the long-term solution is to > > [incrementally] remove dyngen altogether, and replace it with a > > had-written code generator. I've discussed this in a bit more detail > > with Fabrice, and have an almost-working prototype implementation. > > When I get something that actually works I'll post it to the list for > > comments. > > How feasible would it be to do this as an alternative front end to GCJ's > JIT?
GCJ doesn't really have a JIT. It has an interpreter, and the ability to compile classes with gcj. I'd expect anything using gcc at runtime would be too slow to be worthwhile. Paul _______________________________________________ Qemu-devel mailing list Qemu-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
