• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Ron McLeod
  • Paul Clapham
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • paul wheaton
  • Rob Spoor
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Moores
Bartenders:
  • Mikalai Zaikin

Building languages for the virtual machines

 
clojure forum advocate
Posts: 3479
Mac Objective C Clojure
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi Mr. Bruce,
It is the trend these days to build languages for other platforms (CLR and JVM but JVM mainly).
JVM enjoys dosens of them: Clojure, Scala, Erjang, kawa, Mirah and the list is pretty big.
Do you think it is a good idea to build languages for JVM?
Do you think some of these languages will reach success and hit the mainstream or they are experimental and a proof of concept?
Thanks.
 
Author
Posts: 71
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

John Todd wrote:Hi Mr. Bruce,
It is the trend these days to build languages for other platforms (CLR and JVM but JVM mainly).
JVM enjoys dosens of them: Clojure, Scala, Erjang, kawa, Mirah and the list is pretty big.
Do you think it is a good idea to build languages for JVM?
Do you think some of these languages will reach success and hit the mainstream or they are experimental and a proof of concept?
Thanks.



It really depends on the language. The JVM comes with some excellent advantages, like a wide user base, reliability, and good performance. But there's also some baggage when it comes to languages. For example, Ruby was hard to implement because some of the abstractions don't line up very neatly (though Charles Nutter and Thomas Enebo have done an excellent job of smashing through barriers to make this work). Erlang didn't have enough primitives to make all of the reliability work like you'd want, and there's no tail recursion optimization for functional languages.

So I'll give you the cop-out answer and say,

It depends.

Thanks for your question.
 
There are no more "hours", it's centi-days. They say it's better, but this tiny ad says it's stupid:
a bit of art, as a gift, that will fit in a stocking
https://gardener-gift.com
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic