Re: Java bashing

[oconnor@mail.apci.net (James O'Connor)]

In <324BF757.7ACE@gsfc.nasa.gov>, Mike Stark <michael.e.stark@gsfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>James F'jord Lynn wrote:
>>
><snip> 
>>    While this statement is true (and I am glad to see other languages on the
>>  Java VM), I do not know if using Java-ADA (Jada?) conforms to the ISO
>>  standard on the issue of GC.  I believe that it doesn't, but I have not seen
>>  anything on this topic for either side.  Perhaps someone on the Jada project
>>  can enlighten us?
>> 
>I assume you mean the Ada ISO standard -- I believe that it allows but
>doesn't require GC, and it isn't specific about how GC is accomplished.
>I cross-posted to comp.lang.ada to allow the language lawyers to 
>correct and/or embellish.
>
>I saw a post about 6 months ago saying that Smalltalk and Visual Basic
>byte code compilers are also in the works (along with Scheme and maybe
>some other less-used languages).  Does anyone know what's going on with
>these languages??  Is anyone trying to do a C++ to byte-code compiler??
>
>Mike


I know IBM has a Rexx->Java translator available.  It's known as NetRexx.
  It actually translates NetRexx (an extension of Rexx) into Java and then
 feeds the Java code into the Javac compiler.  It works under Win95 and I'm
 currently downloading it to use under OS/2.  Since the translation
 is done by a Java class; the same package should run off any Java 
implementation.  Try 

http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/rexx or
http://www.ibm.com/Technology/NetRexx/nrdown.htm#nrexx

There is also work going on for a Smalltalk->Java byte-code compiler.  I'm not
sure on who is doing it or what status it's in.  This is being met with mixed
 responses.  Some feel it is imperative for the future of Smalltalk; some feel the 
weaker object model and class hierarchy of Java effectively makes a Smalltalk->
 Jave conversion somewhat a waste.

James O'Connor
oconnor@apci.net