 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / Tools / May 2005Subject: C to JVM compiler (AMPC)
Axiomatic Solutions Sdn Bhd announces the availability of AMPC version 1.2. You can purchase AMPC online now at: http://www.axiomsol.com/hedesu/shopping/index.php Major Changes ------------- Version 1.2 supports the MS Windows XP platform, beside Linux x86 and Mac OSX. It also supports the DOUBLE floating point type. Please see the README file for details on DOUBLE floating point type. AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM (generates Java Bytecode). The resulting .class executables will be able to run on any Java Virtual Machine (tm). AMPC enables programmers to write/port applications using C targeting the JVM, thus, opening up a whole new market dimension vis-a-vis JVM-enabled devices such as desktop systems, PDAs, cell-phones, game consoles, set-top boxes, automotive systems (GPS based displays, OnStar, Satellite radio systems, etc), and so forth. AMPC can also be used to turn legacy applications written in C into JVM applications, with a single source base to manage. Use existing C skill sets instead of learning new Java skill sets. AMPC includes a Graphical User Interface (GUI) as part of the Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for fast and organized software development. AMPC is based upon the American National Standards Institute C (ANSI C), X3.159-1989. There are however a few differences between AMPC and a fully compliant ANSI C compiler. The differences of AMPC with a fully compliant ANSI C compiler are described in AMPC's product description. JNI (JVM Native Interface) support is available for the purpose of calling native C or C++ functions from AMPC. AMPC can also generate assembly code for the Jasmin assembler using the asm() directive. It also can call most Java classes using the functions INT_java(), FLOAT_java(), DOUBLE_java(), and so forth. Hardware Requirements: - Any x86 compatible computer running MS Windows XP - Any Macintosh computer running Mac OSX - Any x86 compatible computer running Linux - 128MB RAM minimum Software Requirements: - Java SDK 1.4.2 or newer (JDK 1.5 recommended). More info on AMPC can be found at http://www.axiomsol.com Thank you and best regards. -- Axiomatic Solutions Sdn Bhd http://www.axiomsol.com  Signaturehttp://www.axiomsol.com http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/napi.html > AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM > (generates Java Bytecode). C is a procedural language and as far as I know JVM is an OO framework. How can C code create class definitions, inheritance, use objects etc? May you provide a hello world example in C by using the JVM facilities? SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys > C is a procedural language and as far as I know JVM is an OO framework. How can C code > create class definitions, inheritance, use objects etc? May you provide a hello world > example in C by using the JVM facilities? This is easy. Use only static functions in Java. The hard thing (which cannot be reached directly) is to map the low level functions (memmove, ...) to Java. R.C. > This is easy. Use only static functions in Java. The hard thing (which > cannot be reached directly) is to map the low level functions (memmove, > ...) to Java. I have no JVM experience, but I have .NET experience, which is a CLI VM platform. In .NET, in most (perhaps all) cases, static methods are more run-time expensive than usual methods which do the same operations, and are used either for-do-something-only-once (having the same cost as the initial call of the equivalent method of an object of the class) since it doesn't make sense to create an object of the class for doing something only once - an example is a file operation -, or thread safety (the same resource being shared by more than one threads, and thus additional checks and locks) or other reasons. Also many static methods return objects by themselves. I suppose these are also the case for the JVM. So how does C code can handle returned objects of a static/non-static method? memmove etc are more applicable to native code and not VM code. SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys >> AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM >> (generates Java Bytecode). [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > objects etc? May you provide a hello world example in C by using the > JVM facilities? Your question makes no sense to me. The product is a C --> Java compiler, not a Java --> C compiler. The point of the product is to use C skillsets and not learn Java. C programmers don't do class definitions, inheritance, etc. If they wanted to do all of that in Java, they'd do Java. Presumably their "hello world" is going to be written in C, although I do think it's an interesting question if the C standard libraries are available and output JVM bytecode. SignatureCheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA "We live in a world of very bright people building crappy software with total sh.t for tools and process." - Ed McKenzie > Your question makes no sense to me. The product is a C --> Java > compiler, not a Java --> C compiler. The point of the product is to use [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > written in C, although I do think it's an interesting question if the C > standard libraries are available and output JVM bytecode. From my .NET experience, I do not think it is easy (and in some cases even possible) to provide managed versions of C standard library. Again from this experience of mine, the main difference between a native machine and a VM is that the assembly language of a VM is more high level than the assembly of a native machine. Having C++ in mind here, for example the assembly language of CLI standard (.NET is a CLI compliant VM) has also the concepts of class, enumeration, etc which have some (perhaps minor but existent) differences compared with C++ native ones. That's why in C++ case (and perhaps in other platform neutral languages), CLI features are provided *separately* from the native features (currently in "managed extensions" and in the upcoming C++/CLI). Regarding C things should be even more difficult since it lacks the built-in concept of OO, I can't understand how C programs can interact with the JVM APIs. Unless you can't do anything else under JVM apart from ISO C code, which doesn't make much sense and which is not possible under its entirety (GC is moving objects around and thus you can't rely on pointer arithmetic, or compare two pointers to see if they point to the same object (memory area), memmove etc. You could pin them (I do not know if JVM permits object pinning), but this implies additional run-time cost, forgetting pinned objects which will not be garbage collected possibly resulting in memory leaks, etc). SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys > From my .NET experience, I do not think it is easy (and in some cases > even possible) to provide managed versions of C standard library. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > run-time cost, forgetting pinned objects which will not be garbage > collected possibly resulting in memory leaks, etc). I checked their web site (I guess I should have done this since the beginning), and saw that they provide their own APIs (probably have encapsulated JVMs APIs to functions). In this way I guess it is possible to do JVM programming (this must have been a real pain for them though). :-) SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys > Regarding C things should be even more difficult since it lacks the built-in > concept of [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > objects which will > not be garbage collected possibly resulting in memory leaks, etc). You are confusing "pointers" and "memory addresses". They are the same in many C implementations (depending on what you mean exactly with "memory address"), but in a JVM based C compiler they would most definitely not be the same. Most likely a C pointer would be implemented as a pair (object, offset); possibly (array of byte, index into array). > Regarding C things should be even more difficult since it lacks the > built-in concept of OO, I can't understand how C programs can interact > with the JVM APIs. Unless you can't do anything else under JVM apart > from ISO C code, which doesn't make much sense Sure it does. The product is aimed at the embedded market. A lot of that "other Java stuff" is not needed. Customers may also wish to bridge legacy code from C to the JVM, given that Java is also used in the embedded market. I think the problem here is you're envisioning some kind of "do everything a Java applications developer would want to do" sort of package, which is what actually doesn't make sense. The target audience is embedded C developers, who want to retarget their code to the JVM. > and which is not possible under its entirety (GC is moving objects > around and thus you can't rely on pointer arithmetic, or compare two > pointers to see if they point to the same object (memory area), > memmove etc. Well, it would be interesting to see what subset of C possibility the JVM could support. Those are intelligent questions for the vendor, if you're interested. SignatureCheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA "We live in a world of very bright people building crappy software with total sh.t for tools and process." - Ed McKenzie >>> AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM >>> (generates Java Bytecode). [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > written in C, although I do think it's an interesting question if the > C standard libraries are available and output JVM bytecode. According to the initial description, it's not a C --> Java compiler, it's a C --> Java Bytecode compiler. Java is a high-level language; a C --> Java compiler would generate Java source code from C source code. There's an unfortunate tendency to fail to distinguish between Java (the high-level language) and Java bytecode (a low-level intermediate or interpreted form). They were designed together, but they aren't necessarily logically linked -- and many of the concepts in Java bytecode predate Java the language. It's entirely possible to compile languages other than Java to Java bytecode (for example, there's at least one Ada compiler that generates Java bytecode). It's also entirely possible to compile Java to machine language. C presents some interesting challenges, because its freewheeling use of pointers is difficult to express in Java bytecode. I suspect that a lot of constructs that invoke undefined behavior but happen to work perfectly well with a traditional C compiler will actually fail with a C --> JVM compiler. That's probably a good thing; it provides a way to weed out non-portable constructs in C code that's intended to be portable. Perhaps the C --> JVM compiler can serve the purpose of the DS9000 (a mythical machine with a C implementation that behaves as perversely as possible without actually violating the standard). SignatureKeith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this. >According to the initial description, it's not a C --> Java compiler, >it's a C --> Java Bytecode compiler. Java is a high-level language; a >C --> Java compiler would generate Java source code from C source >code. > Eh, semantics. Java, bytecode, whatever. The point is, it goes C Universe --> Java Universe, and not in the other direction. This implies certain usage patterns and not others. > It's entirely possible to compile >languages other than Java to Java bytecode (for example, there's at >least one Ada compiler that generates Java bytecode). Indeed the Bigloo and Kawa Scheme compilers can produce Java bytecode. I'm not sure how well. The Eclipse Schemeway plugin developer is big into Kawa though. http://schemeway.sourceforge.net/ >C presents some interesting challenges, because its freewheeling use >of pointers is difficult to express in Java bytecode. I suspect that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >to weed out non-portable constructs in C code that's intended to be >portable. Sure, and as an aide de port it may be a valid business model. > Perhaps the C --> JVM compiler can serve the purpose of the >DS9000 (a mythical machine with a C implementation that behaves as >perversely as possible without actually violating the standard). > Is DS9000 an acronym? Any relation to HAL9000? SignatureCheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA "We live in a world of very bright people building crappy software with total sh.t for tools and process." - Ed McKenzie [...] >> Perhaps the C --> JVM compiler can serve the purpose of the >>DS9000 (a mythical machine with a C implementation that behaves as >>perversely as possible without actually violating the standard). >> > Is DS9000 an acronym? Any relation to HAL9000? DS stands for DeathStation. The 9000 was probably inspired by HAL. It goes along with the idea that a permitted consequence of undefined behavior in C is that the implementation makes demons fly out your nose (often abbreviated to "nasal demons"). SignatureKeith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this. > Is DS9000 an acronym? Any relation to HAL9000? A DS9000 is a comp.lang.c imaginary machine, that you do not want to write code with undefined behaviour and run on it. :-) I just searched google to find out who thought it up, and the interesting thing is that there are a few real DS 9000 machines: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22ds+9000%22&hl=el&lr=&selm=Pine.OSF.3.91.960 511143940.24434E-100000%40alpha2.csd.uwm.edu&rnum=1 http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22ds+9000%22&hl=el&lr=&selm=7brpa0%24ftg%40ne ws01.aud.alcatel.com&rnum=6 I found who thought it, and he explains some of its naming: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=el&lr=&selm=slrn7klk8k.rar.kaz%40ashi.FootPri nts.net SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys > I found who thought it, and he explains some of its naming: > > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=el&lr=&selm=slrn7klk8k.rar.kaz%40ashi.FootPri nts.net Ouch. As an ex-DEC employee, that hurts! Well, some of the DEC Alpha workstations were great, and others were pieces of junk. Some idiot decided to ship a 533 MHz machine without much of anything in the way of memory cache. I forget when this super cheapass memory controller was supposed to actually be justifiable / not harmful, but talk about pigeonholeing the applicability of your hardware! We had a 533 MHz box like that in our lab, and it was regularly getting whipped by our 300 MHz machines that had proper caches. We nicknamed the sucker "the Yugo" and put a photo of that ignoble automobile on it as the desktop background. SignatureCheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA > Ouch. As an ex-DEC employee, that hurts! Well, some of the DEC Alpha > workstations were great, and others were pieces of junk. Some idiot [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > MHz machines that had proper caches. We nicknamed the sucker "the Yugo" > and put a photo of that ignoble automobile on it as the desktop background. Interesting. This also makes his explanation more clear. :-) SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys > C is a procedural language and as far as I know JVM is an OO framework. > How can C code create class definitions, inheritance, use objects etc? May > you > provide a hello world example in C by using the JVM facilities? The program takes as input the text #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { printf("Hello world\n); return 0; } The C to JVM compiler then creates a class called something (probably based on the name of the C source file) class hello_c { static void main() { system.out.println("Hello world"); } } It has the intelligence to know that the call to printf() can be relaced by a call to System.out.println() if you remove the trailing newline. This file then gets fed to a Java complier, which produces a Java .class file. In practise it wouldn't bother creating an intermediate human-readable Java file and the Java compiler would be integrated into the C to JVM compiler. But that's just a detail. Also it would have to generate lots of fancy Java code to handle more complicated printf() calls. > The program takes as input the text > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > But that's just a detail. Also it would have to generate lots of fancy Java > code to handle more complicated printf() calls. Yes, C and any language can be used to produce java bytecode. I had two misconceptions. The first that it somehow enabled the developer to access the OO API of JVM directly, and secondly that it was aimed to PCs and not toward to embedded devices only. The answer to the first is that they created a procedural API and the second is embedded devices of course and thus a smaller pain than what it would be to wrap the entire JVM API to procedural. It is something like the case of .NET framework vs .NET compact framework. Still the wrapping must have been a pain, unless they have not wrapped everything. In any case, it can be done. However I imagine (since I do not know JVM API), mapping all C structures, libraries and abilities to JVM bytecode, can't be that easy or even possible, when we are talking about *maintaining the C semantics*. Anyway, I am not personally interested in JVM. :-) SignatureIoannis Vranos http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys In comp.lang.c++ Mohd Hanafiah Abdullah <napi@cs.indiana.edu> wrote: > AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM > (generates Java Bytecode). I wonder if this, combined with the Comeau compiler, would allow one to run C++ programs on a JVM? C++ source -> Comeau -> C source -> AMPC -> JVM > AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM > (generates Java Bytecode). The resulting .class executables will be [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > into JVM applications, with a single source base to manage. > Use existing C skill sets instead of learning new Java skill sets. This is, of course, a great idea. Have you got customers? A user base? >> AMPC (Axiomatic Multi-Platform C) is a C compiler/IDE targeting the JVM >> (generates Java Bytecode). The resulting .class executables will be [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Have you got customers? >A user base? It's a relatively new product which has gone through the beta period and we are marketing it. Beside being downloaded for free for the last 6 months, we have interests from Telekom Malaysia's R&D and Universiti Teknologi Petronas here in Malaysia. Napi Signaturehttp://www.axiomsol.com http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/napi.html [fu-t set] in comp.lang.c i read: >AMPC is based upon the American National Standards Institute C (ANSI C), >X3.159-1989. There are however a few differences between AMPC and a >fully compliant ANSI C compiler. The differences of AMPC with a fully >compliant ANSI C compiler are described in AMPC's product description. would a summary really have been too difficult to include? language: no bit-fields and cannot goto across blocks. elsewhere it is mentioned that argc and argv are predeclared -- which makes me guess that using my own identifiers will fail. tools (not specified by the standard anyway): no debugger. some limitations are not limitations (jni support), while others are incorrect (static -- which is now supported -- is not a type). some are a little hard to grasp just from the list, e.g., i think that one must arrange to compile the (automatically created?) _touch_files.c and/or _pointable_funcs.c files if file scoped objects and/or function pointers are used (respectively). there is no mention of long double or wide-characters. a lack of wide- character support is not a tragedy as c89 itself is woeful. since you target the jvm you should consider supporting amd1 in the future. >Hardware Requirements: >- Any x86 compatible computer running MS Windows XP >- Any Macintosh computer running Mac OSX >- Any x86 compatible computer running Linux i hope the only reason for these is that you merely have not yet compiled ampc using ampc, which would reduce the requirements to: a conforming jdk and sufficient disk space. your own code (even if never released) should be *the* prime example of how useful it is to target the jvm. though i did not read it extensively i noticed some other oddities in the manual, e.g., it is noted that strcoll and strxfrm are not c89 functions (they are), and i hope that the second example in section 4.1 fails to compile (even if one accepts the pre-declaration of argc and argv -- which i find quite annoying -- it still leaves cnt and count undeclared, and has an invalid escape in the string literal argument to the first printf): | #include <stdio.h> | [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] | } | } Signaturea signature Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.