From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:00:31 -0700
Nikolay Ananiev wrote:
> So, is one of parrot's biggest strengths gone? Are we too late?
> Why would the developers use Parrot instead of JVM/CLR/Mono?
We're certainly pleased that we kicked off a revolution in virtual
machines, and that others are beginning to catch on to the fact that
they'll have to support dynamic languages to compete. But, it would be a
little silly to throw in the towel just when others are beginning to
follow your lead. (And I do mean beginning. They're making great
strides, but I still hear strange comments like "We support all features
of dynamic languages. Of course some features, like multiple
inheritance, may be slow, but we don't encourage the use of those
features." from the JVM team.)
Sorry for being slow to pick up on this, but this last bit makes it
sound like a pure marketing tactic. It's as if they are thinking,
"Let's add dynamic language support, so we can say that we can do that
too, but let's not bother to make it good, so it doesn't threaten our
flagship technologies." After all, multiple inheritance is pretty old
hat, and isn't even "dynamic" per se.
If that is the case, there is a risk that the big vendors may be able
to convince the pointy-haired bosses that they do indeed support dynamic
languages, when for practical purposes they don't. It reminds me of a
marketing shift at Franz Inc, the only remaining independent Common Lisp
vendor, I think it was about eight or ten years ago. At the time,
everyone was claiming to support "object-oriented programming" in some
form or other, so Franz started using the phrase "dynamic object-
oriented programming" in order to differentiate themselves. We may one
day find ourselves in the absurd position of having to explain that
Parrot is different because it supports "dynamic dynamic languages."
From: "Nikolay Ananiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:18:08 +0300
"Allison Randal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote . . .
> That's a possibility, but what are you afraid of?
I'm afraid these companies have the opportunity to take the niche
that Parrot aims at, before we get there.
Parrot aims to be a *free* multilanguage VM, which sets it apart right
there -- even if I'm wrong and the big vendors really do want to support
dynamic languages fully (and can pull it off).
-- Bob Rogers
http://rgrjr.dyndns.org/
