On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Joel Webber <[email protected]> wrote: > scalac + a decompiler ought to do the trick, roughly. But you'd still end up > with a bunch of big ugly Java constructs for things like functions, case > classes, pattern matching, and the like. And while I'd love to see what > would happen to that code if you ran it through gwtc, I'm guessing it would > be rather suboptimal relative to what you'd get if you took the (scala -> > (some better IR) -> js) path.
It might be worth it to make scalac -> decompiler -> gwtc a supported option, just to find out how much interest there really is in Scala -> JS. If there's only three people in the world who want Scala -> JS, it's really up to Lex if he wants to spend his lunches supporting them. On the other hand, there might be enough people interested in Scala -> JS that it's worth putting a hold on the Java -> JS polish to get proper support for Scala working RSN. Just a thought. Ian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
