On 5/9/08, Alex Tkachman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here are my thoughts on invokedynamic proposal. > > > http://groovyland.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/invokedynamic-is-it-what-we-really-need/
I think it's unfortunate that the JSR was started with a solution (invokedynamic) rather than a problem (implementing dynalangs on the JVM is hard). This is not reflection on John who came to the JSR long after it was created. I have a lot of sympathy for the position that you outline in your blog post but I would like to wait for the EDR to be published before coming to a settled view on the matter. The devil is in the details and I have not seem all the details yet. John Wilson --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
