On Oct 19, 2007, at 4:45 PM, Peter K Chan wrote:
Well, you could, couldn't you?
The output is a legal Java class files, so you are free to load it up
and use it safely in your Java class. You may need to initialize some
JRuby constructs before you call the method on that class, but how is
this different from any other API? Would you go around and arbitrarily
instantiate any Java objects you find in the class path, without
looking
at the Javadoc first?
As far as I'm concerned, a .class extension used by a language on the
JVM implies that the files are intended to be interchangeable with
Java .class files, and usable from Java. This is most likely an
entirely unreasonable expectation that I made up with no supporting
evidence.
Since there are plans for a compiler that does produce valid Java
class files, it makes sense to me that the output of that compiler
would get the .class extension, and this intermediate step would have
a different extension.
I really don't feel that strongly about it, though, and I'll leave
the rest of the discussion to people who know what they're talking
about.
:dudley
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
