Re: ASP.NET and the iSeries - New Thread

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Walden H. Leverich wrote:
> Thanks for the reference. I have printed it and will read it over my
> upcoming vacation. (Yes, I'm a geek!) One question, how do we know this
> is on the System i's JVM? Seriously, not trying to be a pain. The
> preface to the article mentions the " IBM Developer Kit for Windows(tm),
> Java Technology Edition, Version 1.1.7." 
>   
I suggest an email to Blair Wyman.  Blair has forgotten more about Java, 
especially for the System i, than any of us will ever know.  I suspect 
he'll be more than happy to point you to other things.

> > This is from back in 2000, and it's just scratching the surface
> >     
>
> Why do you say it's just scratching the surface? I know it's old, and
> I'm sure things have improved, but what is there to _show_ me the
> improvements? "It's in there" might cut it for pasta sauce, not for
> code! There's too much, IMO, on the System I that we're told "we don't
> need to worry about" or "it's in there" that we can't see/tell for
> ourselves. I want to understand at a detailed level and see.
>   
Hey, I'm not trying to start a "whose is bigger" argument, even though 
my statement that IBM owns system programming could be construed that 
way.  Honestly, I just thought it was common knowledge that IBM writes 
the best system code, but if you disagree, I'm not going to fight about it.

If you're truly a geek, start looking up Toshio Suganuma's 
publications.  I think Toshio is one of the honchos over at the Tokyo 
lab, where the JIT stuff is done.  Unfortunately, some of the REALLY 
cool stuff is not available for free.  But here's a good one:

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/485/suganuma.html


> As for incorporating older technology, remember the CLR has been around
> for a while too. What I found nice was actually being able to see the
> generated code and know that it had been done. 
>   
Not slinging things, Walden.  Really!  I'm just pointing out that 
perhaps the JIT compilation techniques in the CLR might not exactly be 
"revolutionary" or even new stuff.  This wouldn't be the first time; 
Microsoft is very good at assimilating other technologies.

Joe