Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-14 Thread Dalibor Topic
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote: I would then just take the GPLed code of this GC library, GPLed code of readline, cut out the pieces I need, integrate into my interepreter and call it "interepter features". Thus, according to you, my GPL-incompatible program would be able to use GPLed code thanks to

Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-14 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 04:42:44PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > An example. I am writing an app. A GPL-incompatible or even > > closed-source one. I'd love to use this conservative garbage collector > > library, but it's under GPL, so I cannot. I'd also love to use > > libreadline, bu

Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-14 Thread Brian Thomas Sniffen
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Your implementation creates a huge loophole in GPL, that I do not > believe is there. Let's continue your way of seeing "interepter > features" and see what would be the consequences. > > An example. I am writing an app. A GPL-incompatible o

Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-14 Thread Grzegorz B. Prokopski
On Thu, 2005-13-01 at 23:42 -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > "Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > These facilities include class loading, class instantiation, > > synchronization, garbage collection (ie. you can trigger GC from within > > your program), reflection (ie. you

Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-13 Thread Brian Thomas Sniffen
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > These facilities include class loading, class instantiation, > synchronization, garbage collection (ie. you can trigger GC from within > your program), reflection (ie. you can ask VM "what are methods that > this class have?"). Those are featu

Re: Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-13 Thread Raul Miller
> > Is this relevant to Eclipse? I was under the impression that Eclipse > > was pure java -- that it did not use JNI at all. > > > > If Eclipse does use JNI, would still a question about whether or not > > Kaffe's JNI implementation constitute some kind of extension designed > > to work around t

Illustrating JVM bindings

2005-01-13 Thread Grzegorz B. Prokopski
On Thu, 2005-13-01 at 17:24 -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 04:35:50PM -0500, Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote: > > > But was Kaffe _extended_ to provide such bindings for Eclipse 3.0? > > > > This FAQ entry discusses 2 cases. One is when we have an interpreter, > > that basically