jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [jr3 Microkernel] compiler settings in pom.xml
Date Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:47:45 GMT

>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Michael Dürig<mduerig@apache.org>  wrote:
>>> I'd rather go for a modern language instead of taping things together ;-)
> Michael is certainly thinking of Scala which has its own can of issues ... Syntax not
being the least of it ;)

While syntax is to a certain degree a matter of taste (like int foo vs. 
foo: int), Scala's syntax is at least much more consistent, clean, and 
concise than Java's. However, most of Scala's (or any other more 
functional oriented language) real value is not its syntax. Its about 
having a better suited tool for concurrency (immutability) and big data 
(lazy evaluation, higher order functions).

>> Indeed, that's another point I've been thinking about....
> I am not really sure, whether we should really open this can of worms ...

We should be *very* careful here: while "opening this can of worms" 
might confront us with a lot of challenges, it also opens up a lot of 
chances. Foremost, having to use a new language is a big effort for 
everyone involved. But it can also be an eye opener and a real booster 
in the long run.

OTOH, sticking with Java might leave us lagging behind, entrapped in 
never ending concurrency night mares and memory contention issues.


> I for my part I would expect JR 3 to still be easily embedded in a JVM (deployed in an
OSGi framework running in a JVM, actually), which pretty much excludes anything not being
compiled to Java Byte Code executable by the JVM.
> Regards
> Felix

View raw message