Charles Oliver N. wrote:
Talk about trolling…
Yeah … it’s become a tradition for me every Saturday to try to be
provocative.
you could have Ruby on VM X, where X had full native threading,
advanced garbage collection and memory management, fast synchronous
and asynchronous IO, JITing to native code, runtime optimization, and
built-in support for dynlangs, wouldn’t you want that?That’s the JVM.
That’s the JVM on x86 (32?) under Windows, Linux and SPARC/Solaris. How
about PowerPC Macs? Intel Macs? AMD64? Alpha/Tru64?
Again, I don’t support dropping other implementations of Ruby. If
nothing else, Microsoft will make at least one release of at least one
Ruby implementation. And I’m sure Matz and Koichi will continue
leading the community path.The community path doesn’t have to exclude paid developers from
Microsoft or Sun. I am as much a part of the community as you are.
I’m glad to hear that. As I noted in another post, however, many more
people in the corporate world get paid to work with open source
software than get paid to work on open source software. For every
lucky Charles Oliver N. or John L., there are hundreds of people
like me who can only contribute in off hours and to things not related
to our employment.What I’m not sure about is whether Rubinius will flourish.
Cardinal seems pretty much dead, but I think there’s a lot of energy
behind Rubinius.There’s energy, but not numbers. Rubinius is cool, no doubt about
it…I just hope more folks step up to the plate to help contribute
time and effort into it.
Well … there are some corporations who haven’t taken a major stake in
Ruby like Sun and Microsoft have.Cardinal’s only problem is that it suffers from Parrot.
All I know about Parrot is what I read in the O’Reilly book on Perl 6
and Parrot. I don’t know what’s wrong with Parrot, but I can’t imagine
that it’s anywhere near as good as the JVM.
And perhaps once JRuby runs Rails perfectly, or exceeds YARV
performance, or this or that, we’ll be moved on to other projects. But
there’s a lot of potential in sticking with JRuby for the long haul. I
realize that, and Sun realizes that. You can FUD all you like, but
believe me: Sun is serious about this stuff.
Sun is serious about a lot of things. Intel was serious about a lot of
things until AMD started eating their breakfast (nobody will ever eat
Intel’s lunch or dinner.)Then they said, “OK … lay off a bunch of
managers … focus on our core business … sell off unprofitable
businesses.”
I agree there’s a lot of potential in sticking with jRuby for Sun. That
potential needs to be converted to profit, and that can only be done by
being competitive in the marketplace – by satisficing rather than
optimizing.
contributors, Ola is part of the core team, and we’re going to add
more non-Sun committers soon. Claiming that JRuby is somehow less open
or less communal than C Ruby is pretty silly.
Well … my choice of the Matz/Koichi line has more to do with my lack
of knowledge of the JVM and CLR than it does with the nature of how they
are funded. But judging by the howls in the Linux community that went up
over the Microsoft/Novell deal, the persistent whining around Sun’s slow
pace at opening up Java technology, I think the Matz / Koichi path is
more likely to be more peaceful, in addition to being more interesting
in the computer science sense.
–
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/
If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Of course at Sun we’re all working on open-source