On Thursday 02 April 2009 15:09:12 Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > It's not necessarily Sun's choice when it exhibits external behavioral > changes. Such changes must be standardized so all JVMs will support > them. If it were just up to Sun, it would probably go in (since I know I > want it and several others want it).
Ok. I only care about Sun's JVM because it is the defacto standard. If tail calls are not adopted as a standard across all JVMs, what are the odds of Sun including them just in its own JVM as an extension? > My question back at you is this: what's your motive for posting this > question? I want to make sure I've got my facts straight, both in order to make an informed decision myself and to inform others accurately. Specifically, I am considering diversifying into Scala and/or Clojure and I need to know whether or not the elimination of tail calls may become reliable in those languages in the relatively-near future. If not, that is a serious impediment for functional languages and will rule out all JVM-based languages for me. > And of course you can certainly build OpenJDK + MLVM with tail calls to > try it yourself. The problem is not my building and installing a custom JDK and testing it to make sure that it is reliable myself. The problem is that requiring customers to do that is such a substantial barrier to adoption that it would seriously undermine commercial viability. Suffice to say, *not* having to do that has always been one of the strongest selling points of the JVM. -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
