This is the mail archive of the java-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Java project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

JVM Usenix paper got rejected


Th paper "Java/C++ integration: Writing native Java methods in natural
C++" by Tom and myself was rejected by the Usenix JVM 01 committee.  I
guess they they weren't *that* motivated after all to have a Gcj paper.

I don't think the reviewers quite "got it" - but that's our fault.

        --Per




This note mechanically notifies you of the status of your submission to
the JVM 01 Symposium Conference.  It was generated by a program.

We have reviewed your paper (our number L50) with the title:

Java/C++ integration:  Writing native Java methods in natural C++


I regret to inform you that your paper, was not accepted for
inclusion in the JVM01 Symposium.

We received 50 submissions and accepted only 18 of them;
thus, we inevitably had to reject a number of papers that we found
interesting or well-written.

Below are some (anonymous) comments about your paper from the referees.
We hope you will consider the comments and submit another paper or abstract
to another USENIX conference or workshop, or perhaps to another
conference or publication that might be more suitable for your paper.
You might also consider presenting your ideas at a works-in-progress
(WIP) session at Monterey, CA.  If you're interested, there will be an opportunity
to submit a one-page write-up to the program chair at the conference.

One reviewer noted:

<Public comments, each line indented with white space (sent to authors)>
Please answer the following questions:

1: Is the work of interest to a reasonable portion of the JVM
attendees?  If not, please try and suggest an alternate forum
for the work.

No really, this would be more appropriate at a developer
conference

2: Does the abstract of the work briefly and clearly state its
goals and conclusions?

3: Are the references sufficient?

No, the JVM and JNI Spec should be referenced at the very least.

4: Is the English use and presentation of this work acceptable?

5: What are the weakest and/or least understandable parts of the
work with respect to its presentation?

6: Is the work technically correct?

7: What are the weakest technical parts of the work?

8: Do the goals of this work need to be altered, and if so, how?

9: If you believe that this work should not be accepted, what
changes would be sufficient for you to change your opinion?

Please include anything else that you think might be helpful
to the author here:

Another reviewer noted:

<Public comments, each line indented with white space (sent to authors)>
Please answer the following questions:

1: Is the work of interest to a reasonable portion of the JVM
attendees?  If not, please try and suggest an alternate forum
for the work.

2: Does the abstract of the work briefly and clearly state its
goals and conclusions?

3: Are the references sufficient?
No. Additional references at least to the JVM spec and the JNI spec


4: Is the English use and presentation of this work acceptable?

5: What are the weakest and/or least understandable parts of the
work with respect to its presentation?

6: Is the work technically correct?

7: What are the weakest technical parts of the work? 
The paper proposes to allow C++ programmers to directly access Java objects and
remove one of the prime features of java.
Dynamic class loading is not supported and the class initialization e.g. of class static
variables is the "programmers responsibility". 
It requires a conservative, non copying garbage collector.
It also prohibits a concurrent garbage collector.
It dictates the object layout according to the rules of some C++ compiler. 

8: Do the goals of this work need to be altered, and if so, how?

9: If you believe that this work should not be accepted, what
changes would be sufficient for you to change your opinion?

Please include anything else that you think might be helpful
to the author here:


Thank you again for your submission.  Please contact me if you have
any questions.

We hope to see you in Monterey, CA!

				Your program committee chair,
					Saul Wold






-- 
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://www.bothner.com/~per/

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]