On this subject, has anybody seen John Rose's proposal for a MultiLanguageVM
project?

Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:jvm-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Attila Szegedi
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:43 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: "JVM Dynamic Languages Metaobject Protocol" now released
> 
> 
> 
> On 2007.11.15., at 22:43, hlovatt wrote:
> 
> >
> > I have only briefly looked at your code, which has some great ideas
> in
> > it, so please don't take the following comment as a criticism. It is
> > intended more as trying to understand what you propose.
> 
> I have a saying "talk is cheap compared to working code", and if I can
> express my idea so that a computer can execute it, then it is probably
> suitable (at least within this crowd) to communicate the ideas clearly
> to others. So even if in the long term none of the current code would
> survive in its current form, it'd still have served a purpose as a
> stepping stone in an overall community effort. (Although I do
> naturally hope it will evolve into something really generally
> useful...)
> 
> > A form of interoperability that I didn't see in your examples, though
> > I might have missed it, is deriving classes. For example language 1
> > defines a class Base and language 2 wants to derive from Base. This
> is
> > assuming that both languages are OO. Can you do this?
> 
> No, there's no facility for that. The scope of my work so far was
> allowing cross-language manipulation of existing object instances, and
> I didn't consider cross-language class extensibility, although that's
> certainly intriguing.
> 
> I actually don't even momentarily see an easy or generic way to add
> this capability (I have the excuse that it's almost midnight over
> here :-) ). Not all OO languages even have a concept of class -- i.e.
> JavaScript uses prototype-based, not class-based inheritance.
> 
> That said, representAs() could be maybe generalized somehow. I.e. if
> you provide an object/class in language B that provides some of
> overrides for methods in a base class in language A (without
> explicitly "extending" it), and the code in A language asks for an
> instance of the base class, and is passed the object from language B,
> it might examine it (duck-typing style) to see whether it can
> meaningfully represent an object of the base class from A. This is
> just an idea to further expand on later but might allow for easy
> construction of commonly used things that are usually passed back and
> forth between environments (callbacks/delegates etc.). Anyway,
> midnight. If I figure out something better in my sleep, I'll write it
> up in the morning :-)
> 
> (One thing you _did_ remind me of in an unrelated way is that I'd
> probably need to add constructor invocation of callables, i.e.
> callAsConstructor() (or callNew()) counterparts of call() methods.)
> 
> Attila.
> 
> >
> >
> > On Nov 15, 9:12 am, Szegedi Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> I finally got around to packaging up the current state-of-art of my
> >> metaobject protocol library as a downloadable release (source +
> >> binaries + documentation), plus putting up a very basic website
> >> (hosting an information page + JavaDoc) for it.
> >>
> >> I haven't got around to setting up dynalang.org yet, so the website
> >> is
> >> for now hosted at <http://dynalang.sourceforge.net>.
> >>
> >> The fact there is now a release does not intend to confer either a
> >> sense of completeness or rigidity. It is versioned at humble 0.3.
> It
> >> is pretty much open to modifications and is also probably not
> >> complete
> >> yet (i.e. I fully expect people to need further features for
> >> integrating with their particular language runtime). The release
> just
> >> strives to make it easier for people to get started with it, as it's
> >> now available as a HTTP download instead of only through SVN. Also,
> >> having a release means there's now a baseline for purposes of
> >> tracking
> >> changes in a changelog file etc. Unit tests cover about 75% of the
> >> code right now, so it's fairly safe to say it does what it is
> >> intended
> >> to do, but of course, bugs are always to be expected.
> >>
> >> In completely unrelated news, today's also my birthday :-)
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>   Attila.
> > >
> 
> 
> > 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.34/1134 - Release Date:
> 11/16/2007 9:52 AM
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.5/1149 - Release Date: 11/24/2007
10:06 AM
 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM 
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to