[virtmach] MS Common Language Runtime
Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:09:15 +0100
>> I think the main reason that Microsoft don't want their IL
>> representation labelled as "bytecode" is marketing goals. Microsoft
>> have been very studiously avoiding mentioning Java and in particular
>> avoiding comparing the MS CLR to the Java. I guess you can draw your
>> own conclusions from that.
> I can understand MS's point of view. I worked on the Dis VM that
> is part of the Inferno OS from Bell Labs. Its "VM Instructions"
> were not considered bytecode because the instructions were encoded
> to be more then one byte (instructions were a byte, but the instructions
> had operands included in the stream). So the term bytecode was not
> appropriate. We just called it the Dis VM Instruction set.
That's interesting, I've always thought of the instruction set for the VM
I've been working on* as "bytecode", although they way its encoded an
instruction is always a 32bit word, with the first byte as an opcode, and
the other three as operands.
*It doesn't have a fancy name, its just gets called "the VM", or
occasionally "the behaviourscript VM", buts that's another story...