On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 4:12:13 PM UTC-4, JvJ wrote: > > > > The main motivation would be performance gains. >
Sounds like competing performance-wise with the JVM is extremely difficult. My best guess is that a successful new Clojure implemention will have these qualities: * be interpreted (performance not a goal --- already have Clojure) * be interpreted (compilation not a goal --- already Ferret, ClojureC, etc) * not run in a browser (already ClojureScript) * not compile to $other-language/bytecode (already Hy, clojure-scheme) * not be designed _only_ for embedding (already TinyClojure (... TinyScheme, ... Lua)) * easy interop with C/native libs * fast startup * small footprint * probably not a _complete_ subset of Clojure, and that's _OK_. * have a common, community-accepted free software license, such as GPL3 or LGPL3 It's main drawback would be lack of libraries at first, but people really like writing Clojure, so I suspect it wouldn't be a problem for long. -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
