On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 05:06:27AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because the Python folks didn't have a problem basing JPython off of
CPython.
Actually, this one isn't a good comparison. Python is substantially easier
to parse, and, is a much simpler language. I like Perl because it
Jarkko Hietaniemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Re: Giving data about why it's hard to use B:: to port to the JVM]
Yes, *PLEASE*. Some hard data is always nice, even when (or especially
when) it's unpleasant to hear.
I won't have "hard numbers", as it is always completely possible that some
Jarkko Hietaniemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why should we center our entire design around C? Sure, the canonical perl6
Because that's what we got. Because that's what we have in the maximal
number of platforms. Because that's what works.
The design doesn't have to center around the
bkuhn wrote:
Why should we center our entire design around C?
Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because Perl is a write-once-run-anywhere platform, and C is the only
viable way of maintaining Perl support on all of the platforms currently
supported.
Because most (all?) of the
At 07:49 AM 12/6/00 -0800, Daniel Chetlin wrote:
Simply deciding that `eval STRING' is "unimplemented" on these
theoretical ports and binary compiles is the best idea I've heard yet,
but we should remember that `require' is built on `eval STRING'.
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 08:30:06PM
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:23:55PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
At 07:49 AM 12/6/00 -0800, Daniel Chetlin wrote:
Simply deciding that `eval STRING' is "unimplemented" on these
theoretical ports and binary compiles is the best idea I've heard yet,
but we should remember that
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:23:55PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
However, the JVM is a powerful environment for generalized bytecode and for
allowing bytecode of different languages to communicate.
So's Microsoft vaporware ".NET platform". And the second version
of that bytecoded runtime
