On Saturday 19 April 2008 14:28:53 Patrick Wright wrote: > Hi Charlie > > 0.02: > > - Discussion of a few key languages that could be arguably considered > > "popular" and where they stand in their development processes > > I'd recommend also at least covering (or listing), in brief, the range > of languages the JVM has been used to support, even if they haven't > developed a large user base--this could include all sorts, including > the LISP and Scheme dialects, for example.
This is a chicken and egg problem. OCamlJava would surely be far more widely used if it wasn't crippled by missing JVM features. F# is an obvious example of what OCamlJava could become if these limitations were removed. I suspect OCaml/F# would be a lot more compelling than Lisp/Scheme but YMMV. We would certainly jump on the OCamlJava bandwagon if it were feasible and we would probably even create JVM-based languages of our own (for technical computing). -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
