oss revisited (briefly!) -- GROOVY
[1/5] from: jason:cunliffe:verizon at: 17-Feb-2004 14:31
Max wrote:
> IMHO Java is dying... slowly but surely. probably because microsoft
split the java idea with their own Jscript and encouraged as many different
java platforms, in order to discredit it in the long-run with fragmented
developer/code bases.
I disagree. Java seems to be doing much *better* these days. Lots of cool
projects and people building farmeworks which interoperate.
Also iirc Jscript was/is M$ version of Javascript [ECMA 262]- *not* Java.
Now appearing as Jscript.NET
http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jscript/
...But yes M$ did try to hurt Java by breaking deliberately from the spec, so
Sun took M$ to court and won that round I think..
> seems nowadays, everyone is rushing to support python... oh, I guess it
has nothing to do with the fact that it is 100% open source.
hmm... Well meanwhile Language Lovers, check out Groovy:
http://groovy.codehaus.org/
Groovy is a powerful new high level dynamic language for the JVM combining
lots of great features from languages like Python, Ruby and Smalltalk and
making them available to the Java developers using a Java-like syntax.
Groovy is designed to help you get things done on the Java platform in a
quicker, more concise and fun way - bringing the power of Python and Ruby
inside the Java platform.
Groovy can be used as an alternative compiler to javac to generate standard
Java bytecode to be used by any Java project or it can be used dynamically
as an alternative language such as for writing scripts or unit test cases.
- Jason
[2/5] from: maximo:meteorstudios at: 17-Feb-2004 15:08
> Max wrote:
> > IMHO Java is dying... slowly but surely. probably because
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
> Lots of cool
> projects and people building farmeworks which interoperate.
that's news to me... thanks for setting records straight !
I guess I'm burying myself too deeply in python and rebol.
Is it still slow?
> Also iirc Jscript was/is M$ version of Javascript [ECMA 262]-
> *not* Java.
I know, but newbies don't always, and this is one of the forms of deceit I meant being
used by M$. Its like if M$ invented a new language (yet again) and called it rebolScript.
> Now appearing as Jscript.NET
> http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jscript/
>
..NET: because no one had yet reached this level of bloat.
;-)
> hmm... Well meanwhile Language Lovers, check out Groovy:
>
> http://groovy.codehaus.org/
>
I think its syntax looks like yet another C Look-alike like java. Remember pascal, delphi,
language E (for amigans ;-) , language D, etc, etc, etc...
There is more to a language than just is featureset (especially nowadays, with everyone
trying doing much of the same).
rebol's SYNTAX (or lack of) is its main feature. The fact that refering to a function
and a variable IN EXACTLY the same syntax, allows MANY code tricks. The fact that code
IS data (even the currently executing one) also sets it appart.
In this arena, rebol is still king IMO. imagine trying to generate dynamic nested code
in python... It must be a nightmare!
peace! ;-)
-MAx
[3/5] from: andreas::bolka::gmx::net at: 17-Feb-2004 21:25
Tuesday, February 17, 2004, 9:08:15 PM, Maxim wrote:
>> Max wrote:
>>> IMHO Java is dying... slowly but surely.
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> I'm burying myself too deeply in python and rebol.
> Is it still slow?
if you don't behave, just as slow as any other language when you don't
behave.
--
Best regards,
Andreas
[4/5] from: jason:cunliffe:verizon at: 17-Feb-2004 16:18
> > I disagree. Java seems to be doing much *better* these days.
> > Lots of cool
> > projects and people building frameworks which interoperate.
>
> that's news to me... thanks for setting records straight !
> I guess I'm burying myself too deeply in python and rebol.
>
> Is it still slow?
I don't know. I am not a Java programmer.
But some good indicators I use are quality and scope new Java books,
including the excellent "Head First Java".
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/hfjava/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0596004656/002-3360361-8744060?v=glance
Possibly there will be a Python version of that before long. Of course I'd
love to see a "Head First Rebol" on the shelves next to them :-)
And handful of Java goodies for example..
JSyn - java audio synthesis
http://www.softsynth.com/jsyn/
JMSL - Java Musical Specification Language [Java port of older Amiga JForth
framework]
http://www.algomusic.com/jmsl/
Bill Hibberd's VisAD
VisAD is a Java component library for interactive and collaborative
visualization and analysis of numerical data. The name VisAD is an acronym
for
Visualization for Algorithm Development"."
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/visad.html
Eclipse
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/index.html
OpenIM - Java Jabber server
http://www.open-im.net/en/
OpenMap - Java Geography
http://backspaces.net/blogs/JavaGIS/
Natalia and Gennady Andrienko's GIS projects
http://allanon.gmd.de/and/and.html
> > Also iirc Jscript was/is M$ version of Javascript [ECMA 262]-
> > *not* Java.
>
> I know, but newbies don't always, and this is one of the forms of deceit I
meant being used by M$. Its like if M$ invented a new language (yet again)
and called it rebolScript.
Yes but it was Netscape who came up with daft and very confusing
'Javascript' name. Originally it was called 'Livescript' or something like
that c.1996. Even at that time it would have been better to have just called
it 'WebScript or 'BrowserScript'.
> > Now appearing as Jscript.NET
> > http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jscript/
> >
>
> .NET: because no one had yet reached this level of bloat.
Today I am not pro or con .NET for the simple selfish reason that I run
important apps on Win32 which now offer scripting API. These happened fairly
quickly, and I think in part that is thanks to .NET saving the
developers/vendors a lot of time and hassle to expose their tools.
But yes I assume from the moment I turn on my WinXP machine in the morning
that I am running on top of a lot of M$ bloat. But it works and many good
apps even work really well. Optimally - no way.
<rant>But for the same reason I am gonna vote whatever candidate the Dems
put up in November to get GWBush and his evil gang of greed out of office.
It's a pragmatic strategic vote only. A change is better than none at this
moment. Do I think the next president and this regime will be much better.
We'll see. Do I think Democracy is broken and needs reinventing -- you
betcha!
</rant>
> rebol's SYNTAX (or lack of) is its main feature. The fact that referring
to a function and a variable IN EXACTLY the same syntax, allows MANY code
tricks. The fact that code IS data (even the currently executing one) also
sets it apart.
> In this arena, rebol is still king IMO. imagine trying to generate
dynamic nested code in python... It must be a nightmare!
Yes I agree.
But isn't that partly because REBOL is a functional language in many
respects. ie, isn't the same true of ML and family?
http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh//faq.html
http://www.dcs.napier.ac.uk/course-notes/sml/introfp.htm
And there is recursion technique in Python which might be used to great
effect. I like Python very much. I always see it as a highly readable
language. So in general python programmers seem to strive for simple
legibility instead of being extra clever or super condensed. Python code is
linear and function is equally visibly at all times. Rebol can be
beautifully concise but also often hard to know what to expect.
The interesting to me is how well in comparison Rebol scales and maintains
legibility for other programmers.
For authors, it is wonderful especially interactively. And very hard to look
at other languages with all that damn punctuation they probably don't really
need. Gotta love Python's white space indentation though.
I crudely summed this difference up some time ago by saying that Python is
a reader's language, while Rebol is a writer's one. The same used to be said
of FORTH also.
what do you think?
cheers
- Jason
[5/5] from: maarten:vrijheid at: 17-Feb-2004 22:50
>I crudely summed this difference up some time ago by saying that Python is
>a reader's language, while Rebol is a writer's one. The same used to be said
>of FORTH also.
>
>what do you think?
>
Start writing ;-)
--Maarten
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted