We need Boo on the JVM in a bad way. On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 6:53 PM, John Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Apr 19, 2008, at 3:16 PM, Rodrigo B. de Oliveira wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Brian Frank > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> ... I personally > >> think the JVM is a much better platform for alternate languages > >> than .NET. > > > > Why? > > My take as a JVM engineer (which is a limited but interesting > perspective) is that any of the good JVMs provides C-level > performance for many interesting Java codes, while the CLR provides > early-Java-level performance. The JVMs have been competing with each > other on performance for a decade, and it shows. > > Performance isn't everything, but it often turns out to be important. > > More thoughts here: http://blogs.sun.com/jrose/entry/ > bravo_for_the_dynamic_runtime > > I'd love to see a Boo-like thing for the JVM someday. I enjoy > languages which cleverly integrate a small number of high-leverage > features, rather than juxtapose a bunch of shallow hacks. > > -- John > > > > > >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
