On Thursday 24 April 2008 21:01, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > Randall R Schulz wrote: > > On Thursday 24 April 2008 19:47, Jim White wrote: > > ... > > > >> ... And not being JVM-specific > >> (although that is it's "native" platform) hardly seems like a bad > >> thing... > > > > It wasn't a value judgment, but a reaction to the fact that it was > > listed in response to a request for JVM-specific languages. While > > the ANTLR processor itself runs in the JVM, it is agnostic as to > > the language of the code it generates. > > It wasn't a request for JVM-specific languages...just JVM languages. > In other words, F# might be great, Boo may be awesome, but they're > not really on-topic for my talk. But Python, Ruby...perfect example > cases.
Well, I'm not sure exactly what distinction you're drawing, but ANTLR is neither a JVM language nor a programming language in any but a very narrow and specialized sense. It does define a language with which you communicate your specifications to it, but that's essentially true of all computer programs that accept input. > - Charlie Randall Schulz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
