Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Santiago Gala wrote: >> El jue, 23-02-2006 a las 20:44 -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi escribió: >> >> (...) >>> A good friend of mine used to have "cat juggler" as his title and I >>> was thinking about using "software plumber" as mine at one point. >> >> Fair enough, I used to have "problem solver" or "I solve your problems >> for a fee" as mine. >> >>> >>> I tend to prefer somebody who admits to be a religiously attached to >>> something than those who pretend to be objective about it and deep >>> inside they are not. >>> >>> Not sure this is the case, but that's how I read it. >>> >> >> OK, I just got surprised. I'm giving a talk on "Software and Artistic >> Expression" in two weeks, so I kind of understand code as speech. From >> there to code as scripture there is just some sliding slope. >> >> I can grok evangelist as a metaphor, but being a Theologian would in >> my view mean that src.zip is some sort of holy scripture, thing that >> I'm far from believing. Oh, and heresy outside of the JCP church. :-P >> >> What is more, such a title helps building on the tradition of java as >> a "mono(theistic)culture", together with the .NET. one >> >> Just yesterday I got squeak/smalltalk communities criticized (and I >> agree) for being too closed in themselves, and it rang bells about >> java being sort of the same. Having been part of both communities, I >> can't but sympathise with Ben Hyde's "Small Gods" post: >> http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2003/06/small-gods >> >> Getting closer to topic, I wonder if someone can post here a >> subjective summary of the ideas on support for dynamic languages in >> future java. I'm concerned about the stagnation of jython (barely >> commits since 2.2a1) and I would also like to know how far is support >> for dynamic languages going to be. >> >> In particular, things like smalltalk's primitive "anObject become: >> anotherObject", which will turn all references to an object to >> references to a different one seem difficult to mix with the static >> typing nature of java, and I would like to know more about the >> approach they are going to take for such kind of problems. > > I agree with you (and Ben) about the fact that monoculture brings > stagnation, but I don't think this is a good place for talking about > "java innovations". > > <hat type="project mentor"> > This project is about implement a JVM as specified by the JCP, of which > the ASF is part of. > > Changing and influencing that JVM spec is out of scope it if brings > incompatibilities that will preclude passing the certification stage. > </hat> > > This said, it is not impossible for Harmony to be instrumental in > showing that additions to the JVM might be beneficial for the outside > world and therefore submit them for review to the JCP. > > There is *nothing* that prevents us from implementing harmony-specific > features, if this doesn't stop us from passing the TCK. >
Yes, well put. Tim -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
