Jon Harrop wrote: > 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.
Well, you can always build and release a binary yourself, since it's GPLed...you just can't call it "Java" or "JVM" because it's not being held to those standards. Would that make you comfortable enough to run something like MLVM with its early tail call support? - Charlie --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
