* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? [not found] ` <8900o-4qh.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net> @ 2003-04-29 5:24 ` Kent Paul Dolan 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Kent Paul Dolan @ 2003-04-29 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw) The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote: [about C# not being the only language of .NET] > C# is 1 of 20 languages supported by, among other things, the MSIL. > I'll admit to some curiosity as to how many languages are > supported by Java bytecode -- Java of course being one of them. Well, at least Ada compiles into Java bytecode as well, in at least one commercial compiler. Which raises an interesting point; why not Pascal, which used to compile to a bytecode in one version (UCSD Pascal); surely a port to translate to Java bytecode instead should be fairly straightforward? > However, there's a flip side: Java bytecode may support only one > language, but that could mean it supports it very well. :-) But on the gripping hand, targeting other language compilers also to Java bytecode would be a tremendous portability boost for those other languages, and give them ready access to the massive Java libraries and open source movement. I'd love to see a Fortran 95 to Java bytecode compiler, e.g. xanthian. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? 2003-04-29 5:24 ` Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? Kent Paul Dolan @ 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton 2003-04-29 6:54 ` Greg Lindahl 2003-04-29 18:35 ` Wesley Groleau 2003-04-30 2:09 ` Richard Riehle 2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Tom Shelton @ 2003-04-29 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) "Kent Paul Dolan" <xanthian@well.com> wrote in message news:a3eaa964.0304282124.4b86fbf6@posting.google.com... > The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote: > > I'd love to > see a Fortran 95 to Java bytecode compiler, e.g. He, He! .NET's got one of those! Actually I think there are 2. Tom Shelton ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton @ 2003-04-29 6:54 ` Greg Lindahl 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Greg Lindahl @ 2003-04-29 6:54 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <wFora.1891$O%.244417@news.uswest.net>, Tom Shelton <tom@mtogden.com> wrote: >> I'd love to >> see a Fortran 95 to Java bytecode compiler, e.g. > >He, He! .NET's got one of those! Actually I think there are 2. Can you please not respond to K*nt's trolls in widely cross-posted threads? I know he's gotten more mellow in the past 15 years, but he's still mostly a kook. Followups trimmed. greg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? 2003-04-29 5:24 ` Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? Kent Paul Dolan 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton @ 2003-04-29 18:35 ` Wesley Groleau 2003-04-30 2:09 ` Richard Riehle 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Wesley Groleau @ 2003-04-29 18:35 UTC (permalink / raw) >>C# is 1 of 20 languages supported by, among other things, the MSIL. >>I'll admit to some curiosity as to how many languages are >>supported by Java bytecode -- Java of course being one of them. http://grunge.cs.tu-berlin.de/~tolk/vmlanguages.html > But on the gripping hand, targeting other language compilers > also to Java bytecode would be a tremendous portability boost > for those other languages, and give them ready access to the > massive Java libraries and open source movement. I'd love to > see a Fortran 95 to Java bytecode compiler, e.g. See above. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? 2003-04-29 5:24 ` Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? Kent Paul Dolan 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton 2003-04-29 18:35 ` Wesley Groleau @ 2003-04-30 2:09 ` Richard Riehle 2003-04-30 7:46 ` Tim Tyler 2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Richard Riehle @ 2003-04-30 2:09 UTC (permalink / raw) Kent Paul Dolan wrote: > Well, at least Ada compiles into Java bytecode as well, in at > least one commercial compiler. Which compiler supports the current JVM? JGNAT no longer does. Is the Aonix compiler up-to-date for the current JVM? Richard Riehle ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? 2003-04-30 2:09 ` Richard Riehle @ 2003-04-30 7:46 ` Tim Tyler 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Tim Tyler @ 2003-04-30 7:46 UTC (permalink / raw) In comp.lang.java.advocacy Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com> wrote: : Kent Paul Dolan wrote: :> Well, at least Ada compiles into Java bytecode as well, in at :> least one commercial compiler. : Which compiler supports the current JVM? JGNAT no longer : does. Is the Aonix compiler up-to-date for the current JVM? That shouldn't make much difference - since the bytecode from Java 1.02 still runs fine on the latest JVMs. -- __________ |im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@tt1.org ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-04-30 7:46 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <3EAAC29B.4050700@prodigy.net> [not found] ` <8900o-4qh.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net> 2003-04-29 5:24 ` Is Microsoft de-emphasizing C# ? Kent Paul Dolan 2003-04-29 6:08 ` Tom Shelton 2003-04-29 6:54 ` Greg Lindahl 2003-04-29 18:35 ` Wesley Groleau 2003-04-30 2:09 ` Richard Riehle 2003-04-30 7:46 ` Tim Tyler
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox