[philly-lambda] Re: Scala, anyone?

["Andrew Gwozdziewycz" <apgwoz@gmail.com>]

> On 7/19/07, Andrew Gwozdziewycz <apgwoz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think we are both a bit confused by each others comments. For one, I'm not
> > sure what the CLR has to do with Scala, other than the fact it is a
> > virtual machine.
> > Scala *does not* compile to CLR compatible code. J# which does compile to
> > CLR code, *is not* compatible with Scala compiled to the JVM.
>
> I fully understand all that you've said thus far. My original comment
> was saying that I disagreed with the statement that Scala looked like
> it was hacked up by some Java guys, and said that instead I thought
> that F# looked like it was "hacked up" by some .NET CLR guys, thus
> filling the "hacked up" slot of functional languages on
> imperative-based VMs. It was, in essence, a joke.

Understood. Apparently I'm incapable of seeing humor. Sorry for the
confusion and defense.

However, I fail to see how a distinction can be made about "imperative-based"
VMs. Considering the fact that native machine code is really "imperative",
all Compiled functional languages run on an "imperative-based" machine.

But anyway, like I said, sorry for the confusion I've caused.


-- 
Andrew Gwozdziewycz
apgwoz@gmail.com
http://www.apgwoz.com  | http://www.photub.com

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Philly Lambda" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to philly-lambda-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/philly-lambda?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---