On 2/3/2012 6:12 AM, Pid wrote:
On 03/02/2012 07:55, André Warnier wrote:
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: David Kerber [mailto:dcker...@verizon.net] Subject: Re:
Regarding compatibility
It will be open source, right?
Both open *and* closed source.
But you won't know which until you download it and open the package...
Furry source...
Are we all going to be entangled in this?
Mmm, that's an interesting thought. The DarkEnergy compiler should be
entangling. This way, any modification to the source will be
instantantly reflected in the object code (and all its copies), wherever
they are. No more updates to download, every installation forever
up-to-date etc. Think of the savings in bandwidth.
Makes the revision process a bit tricky though.
And need a disentangling backup utility.
Like it.
+1
DarkEnergy[TM] compiles to bytecode presumably? Seems everyone& their
dog is inventing JVM languages, no reason why we can't. QLG is a hard
problem to solve, so I'd expect the syntax to be more complex, than say,
Scala.
p
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
