On Feb 16, 2009, at 7:17 PM, dmiller wrote:
> > > > On Feb 16, 5:33 pm, Chouser <chou...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:43 PM, dmiller <dmiller2...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> I don't know if you've looked at ClojureScript at all, but it's a >> similar if noticeably less ambitious project to compile Clojure >> code to >> JavaScript. It's in clojure-contrib already, but in >> trunk/clojurescript instead of trunk/src. My reasons for this were >> (1) I wasn't quite sure how to lay out the directory structure and >> didn't want to mess up anyone else, and (2) it doesn't work with >> Clojure trunk but instead requires a patch and rebuild of Clojure >> itself. This patch is stored right there in contrib as well. >> > > I have looked briefly at ClojureScript. > > Placement: I'm guessing a parallel off-trunk placement. This code is > completely independent of Clojure/JVM, except for the bootstrap *.clj > files. I have those included in the project, so I'm not broken by > Clojure/JVM changes. > > Also, this code is not set up for casual play. You need to be in > Visual Studio, download the DLR, connect Tab A to Slot B, etc. I'm > thinking it should not be in trunk/src by the criteria you cite. > > >> This is the majority of what the ClojureScript patch changes -- >> moving >> explicit uses of non-Clojure Java class names out of .clj files and >> into clojure.lang.RT (or other appropriate Clojure classes) so that >> the .clj can be loaded as-is. RT and Numbers have to be ported by >> hand anyway, so it's not significantly worse on that end. >> >> I'd be very interested to compare notes and see if our needs have a >> common solution. >> > > I need to make the same kinds of changes to the *.clj files. This has > not been automated yet, so being in synch is a matter of hand- > editing. > > We most definitely need to compare notes. > > >> Sounds great! But there's one very important question you didn't >> address. What are you going to call it? :-) >> >> Seriously, though, since it seems likely that a majority of code >> written to run on your port will not work on Clojure/JVM, because of >> the runtime libs available (please correct me if I'm wrong), it's >> important for a body of code to be able to clearly declare where it's >> supposed to work. A name that is used consistently can help, I would >> think. >> > > This is 100% C#/.NET. > > I'm up for suggestions on the name. The obvious ones: > > - Clojure.net > - ClojureCLR > - IronClojure (paralleling IronPython/IronRuby, unless MS has Iron > trademarked.) > - CLjR (too cute) > > Perhaps Rich will have a preference. He'll have to live with it > longer than anyone and has branding/confusion issues to keep in mind. > I prefer ClojureCLR. Rich --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
