Java/Vame1.3

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnxrtp.devtools
1

We are having problems finding answers to some questions regarding Java
Development and QNX (specifically regarding Visual Age Micro Edition).
Thanks in advance for your help.

  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?
  • Has anyone out there used the Vame/QNX combo for a commercial product?
  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame using the
    Real time extensions cost?
  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?
  • Is Vame an AOT for QNX RTP, or just a JIT?
  • If Vame is not an AOT, does an AOT exist for QNX?
  • Has anyone ported GCJ to QNX?

Thanks

Gary C. Shields

2

“Gary C. Shields” <garycshields_list@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9fidua$gep$1@inn.qnx.com…

We are having problems finding answers to some questions regarding Java
Development and QNX (specifically regarding Visual Age Micro Edition).
Thanks in advance for your help.

  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?

Depends of so large your Java application and RAM size.

  • Has anyone out there used the Vame/QNX combo for a commercial product?
  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame using
    the
    Real time extensions cost?
  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?

MicroView recomended. With PhAB you need JNI (not realized for QNX 6).

  • Is Vame an AOT for QNX RTP, or just a JIT?

No

  • If Vame is not an AOT, does an AOT exist for QNX?

No. AOT and JIT realized only for Win-targets.
See http://www.embedded.oti.com and
ibm.software.vame newsgroup (server- news.software.ibm.com).

  • Has anyone ported GCJ to QNX?

Thanks

Gary C. Shields

Nick

3

Can’t answer all you questions…

  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?

From your statement below (regarding UI) a GUI application under J9 will
be very slow on a 486 66.

  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame
    using the

Real time extensions cost?

If OTI won’t tell you this, I don’t know who can.

  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?

No you cannot use PhAB as the GUI builder; however, if you are genuinely
committed to a 486 66, you really should consider using PhAB, and C code
for your product as it will run many times faster. IMO J9 is usable on
Pentium 166 and above.

4

I’m having questions of my own unanswered (except unofficial ones from Rennie)
But I know there’s a price set for the VM. Ask your QNX sales rep.

On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 05:58:58 -0500, “Gary C. Shields” <garycshields_list@hotmail.com> wrote:

We are having problems finding answers to some questions regarding Java
Development and QNX (specifically regarding Visual Age Micro Edition).
Thanks in advance for your help.

  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?
  • Has anyone out there used the Vame/QNX combo for a commercial product?
  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame using the
    Real time extensions cost?
  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?
  • Is Vame an AOT for QNX RTP, or just a JIT?
  • If Vame is not an AOT, does an AOT exist for QNX?
  • Has anyone ported GCJ to QNX?

Thanks

Gary C. Shields

5
  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?

J9 runs on a Palm. Can’t get much slower than that :slight_smile: Whether it will run
your app in a size/speed you like is another question.

  • Has anyone out there used the Vame/QNX combo for a commercial product?
    ???


  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame using
    the
    Real time extensions cost?
    Ask QSSL.


  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?
    Can’t use PhAB. We support AWT and MicroView. More goodies coming soon > :slight_smile:


  • Is Vame an AOT for QNX RTP, or just a JIT?
    Our JIT and AOT technology is coming along, platform-by-platform, os-by-os,

as customer needs require it. Not sure what the status of x86 is.

  • If Vame is not an AOT, does an AOT exist for QNX?
    We tend to get the JIT working first, then AOT.


  • Has anyone ported GCJ to QNX?
    No idea what GCJ is.

Asking on news://news.software.ibm.com/ibm.software.vame will get you more
precise answers …

–

Patrick_Mueller@oti.com

6
  • Has anyone ported GCJ to QNX?
    No idea what GCJ is.

The GNU java compiler.

–
cburgess@qnx.com

7

Which GUI are you talking about; AWT or MicroView? AWT is pretty fat and
slow. We did it because customers demand it. But it will never perform at
a level an embedded developer would be happy with. It can’t really. We can
optimize our code a bit more, but it will always be about the slowest GUI
library (and biggest) that we’ll ship to customers. MicroView is much
smaller and faster, especially when you run on bare metal without Photon.

If someone >really< wanted to, you could actually build a C app that used
PhAB, and called out J9 to do rando Java stuff. Java (and by inclusion our
J9) supports this thing called JNI (Java Native Interface) which allows you
to call C/C++ code from Java, and call Java code from C/C++. We use JNI for
all our native functionality like file/socket i/o, etc, and we use the
C->Java gateway bit for our Voyager plugin to run applets. It’s all
standard stuff for which there are a few books and many samples available
…

–

Patrick_Mueller@oti.com



“Rennie Allen” <RAllen@csical.com> wrote in message
news:D4907B331846D31198090050046F80C904FB09@exchangecal.hq.csical.com…

Can’t answer all you questions…

  • Before we begin - will a J9 even run on a 486 66MHz?

From your statement below (regarding UI) a GUI application under J9 will
be very slow on a 486 66.

  • What does a Run time of Vame cost? What does a runtime of Vame
    using the
    Real time extensions cost?

If OTI won’t tell you this, I don’t know who can.

  • How do we build the UI. Can we use PhAB as the UI Builder?

No you cannot use PhAB as the GUI builder; however, if you are genuinely
committed to a 486 66, you really should consider using PhAB, and C code
for your product as it will run many times faster. IMO J9 is usable on
Pentium 166 and above.

8

Which GUI are you talking about; AWT or MicroView? AWT is pretty fat
and
slow.

I am talking about AWT.

We did it because customers demand it. But it will never perform at
a level an embedded developer would be happy with. It can’t really.
We can
optimize our code a bit more, but it will always be about the slowest
GUI
library (and biggest) that we’ll ship to customers. MicroView is much
smaller and faster, especially when you run on bare metal without
Photon.

I am sure it is better on bare metal, but the assumption here was J9 on
QNX :slight_smile:

If someone >really< wanted to, you could actually build a C app that
used
PhAB, and called out J9 to do rando Java stuff. Java (and by
inclusion our
J9) supports this thing called JNI (Java Native Interface) which
allows you
to call C/C++ code from Java, and call Java code from C/C++. We use
JNI for
all our native functionality like file/socket i/o, etc, and we use the
C->Java gateway bit for our Voyager plugin to run applets. It’s all
standard stuff for which there are a few books and many samples
available

I’m not ragging on J9, in fact, if bare metal were an option I would
think it would be competitive with QNX/Photon and ‘C’. I was simply
stating that if it has to run on QNX, under Photon on a 486 66, and
(as Gary implied in his post) one likes working with Phab; then coding
in ‘C’ with PhAB would probably yield more satisfactory results overall.

9

I am sure it is better on bare metal, but the assumption here was J9 on
QNX > :slight_smile:

Actually, I’m so entrenched in GUIs, that when I say Bare Metal, I mean, no
platform GUI system (like Photon, Motif, GTK, Qt, etc). We have some Bare
Metal ports of MicroView on QNX (as well as some other OSes :slight_smile:. To me,
Bare Metal doesn’t rule out QNX … we still use the full OS, just don’t use
Photon.

We also have some JIT/AOT (Just In Time compiled/Ahead of Time compiled)
options that are available on some platforms (I don’t that includes QNX with
our currently available release), that will win you back some performance if
you’re willing to trade some memory for it.

–

Patrick_Mueller@oti.com



“Rennie Allen” <RAllen@csical.com> wrote in message
news:D4907B331846D31198090050046F80C9050467@exchangecal.hq.csical.com…

Which GUI are you talking about; AWT or MicroView? AWT is pretty fat
and
slow.

I am talking about AWT.

We did it because customers demand it. But it will never perform at
a level an embedded developer would be happy with. It can’t really.
We can
optimize our code a bit more, but it will always be about the slowest
GUI
library (and biggest) that we’ll ship to customers. MicroView is much
smaller and faster, especially when you run on bare metal without
Photon.

I am sure it is better on bare metal, but the assumption here was J9 on
QNX > :slight_smile:

If someone >really< wanted to, you could actually build a C app that
used
PhAB, and called out J9 to do rando Java stuff. Java (and by
inclusion our
J9) supports this thing called JNI (Java Native Interface) which
allows you
to call C/C++ code from Java, and call Java code from C/C++. We use
JNI for
all our native functionality like file/socket i/o, etc, and we use the
C->Java gateway bit for our Voyager plugin to run applets. It’s all
standard stuff for which there are a few books and many samples
available

I’m not ragging on J9, in fact, if bare metal were an option I would
think it would be competitive with QNX/Photon and ‘C’. I was simply
stating that if it has to run on QNX, under Photon on a 486 66, and
(as Gary implied in his post) one likes working with Phab; then coding
in ‘C’ with PhAB would probably yield more satisfactory results overall.

10

“Patrick Mueller” <patrick_mueller@oti.com> wrote in message
news:9fph0p$o5e$1@nntp.qnx.com…

I am sure it is better on bare metal, but the assumption here was J9 on
QNX > :slight_smile:

Actually, I’m so entrenched in GUIs, that when I say Bare Metal, I mean,
no
platform GUI system (like Photon, Motif, GTK, Qt, etc). We have some Bare
Metal ports of MicroView on QNX (as well as some other OSes > :slight_smile:> . To me,
Bare Metal doesn’t rule out QNX … we still use the full OS, just don’t
use
Photon.

We also have some JIT/AOT (Just In Time compiled/Ahead of Time compiled)
options that are available on some platforms (I don’t that includes QNX
with
our currently available release), that will win you back some performance
if
you’re willing to trade some memory for it.

What is such a big deal with JIT on QNX? Kaffe (free clean-room Java) had
JIT for QNX4 years ago…

  • igor
11

Compare/contrast the performance between J9 and Kaffe and then get back to
us … :slight_smile: Also, our JIT story is fairly closely tied to our AOT story, so
more architectural work is required to get it right in both places.

–

Patrick_Mueller@oti.com



“Igor Kovalenko” <kovalenko@home.com> wrote in message
news:9fpo7j$50e$1@inn.qnx.com…

…

What is such a big deal with JIT on QNX? Kaffe (free clean-room Java) had
JIT for QNX4 years ago…

  • igor