> Glen Starchman <glen / enabledventures.com> wrote:
> That's the tradeoff that Jython had to make.... You want to use an
> existing Python C extension? Rewrite it in Java. Your functionality
> isn't supported by Java? Tough luck. I think that using a language
> other than Java, preferably one that allows for a closer integration
> with the underlying OS (while masking some of the idiosyncracies) is
> ideal. Hence my Smalltalk suggestion.

I see java as a potential trojan horse (not in the pejorative sense but I
can't think of a more accurate term) to get ruby distributed in the
commercial world, where server side java libraries are much easier to get
deployed than native code.  I'm not saying that makes much sense, but in my
experience that's how it works at a lot of big companies.  Let's say, for
example, we think we could start selling ruby solutions for use in web apps.
It'd be a lot easier to pull off if an architecture board doesn't have to
approve deployment of the ruby interpreter.  Just conjecture, though, you
might have some insight into how prevalent Jython is deployed in the
corporate world and whether it being written in java had anything to do with
that.

Wayne