(0000278)
xclerc (Administrator)
2013-08-08 12:02
|
Well, the current implementation for Java extensions is based
on primitives that are compiled to Java bytecode by the code
generator.
On the other hand, the toplevel is currently exactly the same
than the original one, thus interpreting OCaml bytecode.
As a consequence, to support Java extensions in the toplevel,
it is necessary to either provide an implementation for the
aforementioned primitives (e.g. based on reflection), or to
modify the toplevel to make it use Java bytecode rather than
OCaml bytecode.
To summarize, there is no technical reason that this could not
be done, but it needs some work. So, although it is a desirable
feature, don't hold your breath. |