On 11/10/2012 11:03 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
It is too much imo..
Clojure->java -> c++
i would just write C++ code
The API is either Java or C++ or .NET.
I agree that no sane person would go Clojure->Java->C++ :)
Clojure would provide the option of interfacing natively the Java API,
without having to write Java. But then I am left developing in Clojure,
unless I decide to serve to Pharo via http/websockets.
As I do not currently know Java or Clojure or C++, it currently seemed
like learning Clojure as the optimal path of least resistance.
That is with a belief that I could learn Clojure better, easier, faster
than C++, or at least a sufficient subset of C++ to work with NB.
If I could learn a subset of C++ sufficient to interface NB/Pharo with
ForexConnect, then I would be happy to do so.
http://forexforums.dailyfx.com/forexconnect/392705-forexconnect-api-subscribe-updates.html
Especially if I had a roadmap to help provide me with said proficiency
and that I could do so in equal or less time than spending with Clojure.
It is a pragmatic decision. Long term I want to spend my time in Pharo
and not in Clojure or C++, which is why I am attempting what at the
moment requires the least effort or at least by best guess appears to be so.
I have found nothing that I can program and interactively explore and
experiment with better that Smalltalk/Pharo. It is most definitely my
preference to do so. And I so greatly appreciate all of the efforts
being made to make it an option more of the time.
JavaConnect that Stéphane mentioned looks very interesting.
I really appreciate your input into this. I can gauge the effort to
learn Clojure and I find it reasonable. C++ seems from the outside to be
more daunting. I could be wrong. Let me know if you have a different
opinion.
Thanks.
Jimmie
