Lothar Scholz <mailinglists / scriptolutions.com> writes:

> Hello Josh,
>
> JC> On 9/15/05, Joe Van Dyk <joevandyk / gmail.com> wrote:
>>> From an upcoming Rubyconf talk:
>>> 
>>> Reimplementing Ruby
>>> Eric Hodel
>
> JC> Very interesting.  But you'll still need C ;)  I'm interested to know
> JC> how this will effect performance, thoug.
>
> No, you need C to implement a virtual machine, but not for the
> language parser/bytecode compiler/runtime.

Actually, you need C to *bootstrap* a virtual machine.  Lots of other
languages do it that way too, see Squeak or Slime.  They convert their
VM to C, and compile it.  That's just easier than emitting assembly
directly.

> But i'm still convinced that ruby in ruby will got give us any real
> benefits.

I prefer hackable implementations. :-)

>  Lothar Scholz
-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen / gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org