On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:11:11PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
I believe strongly that we need to make sure the design does not become so C
specific so as to leave us where perl5 has left us: "No C compiler on your
platform? Sorry!".
Huh? There are platforms have Java VMs but not C
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 01:17:01PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
We seem to be arguing about the best method for making it *im*possible
to use anything but the initially-chosen-implementation language to
implement perl. This feels like a bad thing.
I don't see that; I see that we're all agreed
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:36:48AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:11:11PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
I believe strongly that we need to make sure the design does not become so C
specific so as to leave us where perl5 has left us: "No C compiler on your
platform?
"Bradley M. Kuhn" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I don't think we should dismiss it out of hand because people don't
do a lot of systems programming C. some of the things we are going to build
for C (if that's what we pick), are already there
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 12:06:36PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
I think that that would be a 'courageous' decision.
Making decisions now that make it hard to use anything other than 1 compiler
are as wise as decisions that make it hard to use anything other than one
implementation
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More importantly, what we're doing is outside Java's area of competence.
We're writing system-level code here. Java isn't a system-level programming
language. This isn't a bad thing, but it means it's an inappropriate
solution to the problem. We
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
And, it will make the barrier for entry for new internals hacker lower.
Really? Do you honestly believe there are more Java programmers than C
programmers? Particularily in the Perl development community!
I would note that if we write in Java, we
