Richard~

It is not open source, but StreamSQL from StreamBase is a 'Complex
Event Processing' language that runs on the JVM.

http://streambase.com/

So that gives you an idea of a very different type of language that
runs on the JVM.

Fair warning: I work for StreamBase.

Matt

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Richard Warburton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  >  Here's my top five "interesting" language projects:
>
>  >  JRuby - pushing the bounds of class generation and dynamic invocation
>  >  perf, as well as pulling a whole other platform into the JVM ecosystem
>  >
>  >  Groovy - providing almost all Java language features and two-way
>  >  integration in addition to many (most?) dynamic language features found
>  >  in languages like Ruby.
>  >
>  >  Jython - A second opportunity to pull a whole platform into the JVM
>  >  world, and a very receptive Python community that doesn't hate anything
>  >  with a J in it
>  >
>  >  Scala - Not obvious? Solid integration with Java and object/functional
>  >  goodness.
>  >
>  >  Duby - Ok, I'm biased, but if I ever get time to work on it Duby could
>  >  marry Ruby syntax with a full complement of Java features and local type
>  >  inference. Exactly what I've been looking for.
>
>  Just an observation - but if you are looking for listing a variety of
>  languages then I would be inclined to list things that are highly
>  distinct.  For example, listing both Jython and JRuby seems somewhat
>  redundant.  Obviously they are both distinct implementations, with
>  differing groups - but is there really that much novelty to the
>  implementation of one compared to the other?  Perhaps just go with
>  JRuby.
>
>  I would replace it with a language/implementation that isn't
>  necessarily in a perfect situation to be implemented on top of the
>  JVM, but whose problems are the kind of things that the Da Vinci
>  project aims to solve.  There's numerous things that have been
>  mentioned on this list over time, e.g. CPS style not integrating well
>  with normal java calling conventions  (I'm thinking of maybe a Scheme
>  implementation), lack of tail call optimisations (please note this not
>  a thread to dig up that can of worms again) - so perhaps one of the
>  failed functional languages of the JVM projects (MLj?) or something of
>  that nature.  Just something a little different instead of all the
>  'Usual Suspects'.
>
>  Good luck with your talk.
>
>   Richard
>
>
>
>  >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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