On Jun 30, 5:15 pm, Chas Emerick <cemer...@snowtide.com> wrote: > An oldie-but-goodie post from Chouser talking about what clojure-in- > clojure is and why it matters: > > http://blog.n01se.net/?p=41
To quote: "But a more fascinating benefit is that porting Clojure to non-JVM targets will be much easier. The majority of the effort so far put into ClojureCLR and ClojureScript has been rewriting the data structures for the target platform. This has required a lot of hand- written C# and JavaScript (respectively) all of which can become quickly obsolete as changes are made to the primary Java versions." ... stuff about running on Parrot etc... Presumably over time we'll have more pure clojure-layers over the ugly java libs. Having to maintain a port version of each of these wrappers for C# and JS and any other target sounds like a lot of unpleasant grunt work to me. I've been working on wrapping the JNDI stuff up in a less retarded interface, for example, but I'm definitely not going to take the time to port it to C# and JS is obviously out so that's at least one tiny step towards a fractured clojure world. I sure don't have fond memories of dropping #+sbcl and #+cmu and # +allegro readers all over my CL code to make all the different CL implementations happy and I don't anticipate much joy in a similarly balkanized clojure world. A clojure written mostly in clojure but still exclusively a jvm lang makes sense but the rest of this just sounds like idle hackery for its own sake. Far be it from me to condemn consenting adults for the ways they choose to spend their spare time though. -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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
