Oops. Here we are at the intersection of Lisp and Java. Eventually
all the projects will be assigned numbers instead of names!
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Raoul Duke wrote:
>
> there are (at least) 2 Qis:
>
> one is java-aop.
>
> the other is lisp++.
>
> sincerely.
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 200
there are (at least) 2 Qis:
one is java-aop.
the other is lisp++.
sincerely.
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
> I antended a talk on Qi at JavaZone 2008.
>
> Qi is a kind of AOP layer that knits together concerns via a bit of
> configuration and some naming conventi
I antended a talk on Qi at JavaZone 2008.
Qi is a kind of AOP layer that knits together concerns via a bit of
configuration and some naming conventions. I'm a bit fuzzy on the
details 6 months out.
A lot of the AOP solutions for Java are trying to introduce concepts
that are more native in a Li
> could be applicable in Clojure. From what I gathered from the tweets
> from Qcon, Qi was mentioned again there. Does anyone know if there
> was anything more to it than "it would be nice"?
(fwiw, Mark T. talked about it a bit on the Qi list.
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Qilang/search?gro
A few months, Rich mentioned Qi's type system on the IRC channel
(http://clojure-log.n01se.net/date/2008-12-11.html#10:25) and how it
could be applicable in Clojure. From what I gathered from the tweets
from Qcon, Qi was mentioned again there. Does anyone know if there
was anything more
