[o:XML] RE: XML] Re: SIDE NOTE: CIL Schema

[Miller, Brian]

Martin Klang wrote:
>
>Alexander Genaud wrote:
>>
>> I should be able to WRITE IT IN JAVA and as long as I had not
>> imported any classes, I should be able to convert it to my javascript
>> framework.
>
>Java -> MLML -> Javascript

As Alexander hints at above, a limitation of source-to-source
translation is that it can't handle JARs, the dominant distribution
format for Java.  I think a bytecode->MLML->JavaScript translator would
be better than one that consumes Java source.  Bytecode parsers are very
mature, and bytecode analysis is almost as easy as Java source analysis.

Emitting JavaScript has appeal.  JavaScript is the desktop's only
universally installed virtual machine.  Most of the logic being
transmitted over the Internet is JavaScript.  Being able to translate
Java (source or binary) to JavaScript could greatly extend Java's reach
into the Web's vast pile of DHTML.  The capabilities of Java might allow
more processing to be shifted to the client, which could be an
industry-wide cost savings that encourages more sophisticated
applications.