Re: Plans for 2.8 - GNOME Managed Language Services?

[Raphael Bosshard <whistler bluewin ch>]

How difficult would it be to use the Java VM for other languages than 
Java. Say, C# or Python?

If I get it right, it would be quite difficult to get Python coop with 
the JVM since it is dynamicly typed. But since it is possible to port 
Java Bytecode to the CLI, the opposite should be quite possible, 
shouldn't it?

Raphael

Ryan McDougall wrote:

> I think its about time we seriously considered promoting other languages
> to first class status, along beside C. We need C for speed in core GTK+
> libraries, but as computers become faster, human time becomes more
> important than computer time, and high level languages vastly improve
> programmer productivity, as well as encourage new developers.
>
> I think that the best way to include managed languages in the GNOME
> desktop in a fair, open and free way, is to mandate a GNOME Virtual
> Machine + Object/Type System and let the individual language designers
> choose to target our platform at their desire. We would only provide the
> base system, and let the implementors worry about JITting their pet
> language to our VM. I would also like to see this done through
> freedesktop, so it will be a "linux thing" not just a "GNOME thing".
>
> The plus side of a unified Object/Type system is we can provide our
> own .NET style high-level library stack which would be usable from any
> language. The code reuse and power of a coherent and unified library
> that works seamlessly in any compliant language (al la .NET) is
> *extremely* tempting.
>
> With the refusal of Sun to open up Java, that pretty much excludes it
> from consideration as the base of implementing VM+obj system. That
> leaves only three options:
>
> 1. Make our own solution - perfect except for the *huge* amount of work
> this option represents.
>
> 2. Parrot VM+Object system - possibly not fast enough for statically
> type languages
>
> 3. mono CLR+CLI - everything we want, but invented by microsoft
>
> I think we should pursue the above options in the reverse order. We
> should use mono's run time VM and CLI object system as a core part og
> GNOME, but not dictate what language uses the components, whether it be
> mono's C# compiler, or Java over IKVM, we won't care. Secondly,
> exploring parrot should be an interesting investigation, provided its
> developers are interested in working with us.
>
> Ideas? Comments? We need to be ahead of the curve on this if we want to
> gain ground on MS; Longhorn is going to be impressive when it finally
> comes. ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>
>