Multiplatform object model

[Jeff Sturm]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Grobarcik Peter wrote:
> > As I see it - there is still a problem doing system development with C++,
> > because of the internalls of different compilers, name mangling and other
> > non standartised things.

Not that this is a C++ list, but... 

It's true that C++ has a history of binary incompatibilities, however
the new ABI in GCC 3.0 is meant to solve that.  It's an industry standard,
not particular to GNU.

> > maybe the Java bytecode or something simmilair (GNU bytecode :-) ) could
> > solve the issue: all compilers would produce some standartised bytecode
> > and then the OS semi-compiler would finalize the task (maybe JIT) - so we
> > can have a fast AND multiplatform code - something like GCJ, but for "all"
> > languages.
> > 
> > Would be such a thing possible?

Strictly speaking, it is certainly possible.  This is often called an
intermediate language, or IL.  It is also a very old idea.

> > Has it sense?

In my opinion, no.  We need better source compatibility so that a
recompile becomes nothing more than e.g. "../configure; make; make
install".  GNU gives us that, mostly.

Why would you need a portable code format other than source?  There are
sound technical and philosophical reasons why a portable IL would
probably not be a good thing for GNU.


Jeff