From: "Glen Starchman" <glen / enabledventures.com>
>
> On Thu, 31 May 2001, Sean Russell wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 09:11:25AM +0900, Wayne Blair wrote:
> > > 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
> > 
> > Or, in our case, it would make using Ruby *possible*.  We don't have the
> > authority to install a Ruby executable on all of the Forest Service servers,
> > but we *can* get authorization to get a jar file installed, and Java is 
> > installed on all Forest Service computers, both servers and workstations.
> > If we had a Java implementation of Ruby, it would become practical to
> > begin application development in Ruby.
> > 
> > --- SER
> 
> Very valid point, and I am sure that Sean is not alone in this
> predicament. Think of all the ISPs that allow a Java installation but
> willl balk at installing yet another language for their users. 
> 

Yes, we're in the same boat too.  We do Java stuff both server-side
and client side.  I've recently discovered JPython - which is currently
my absolute favorite thing about Java.  (I.e. the possibility of not
programming in ((Integer) ((Object[]) a)[1]).intValue() it, er, 
pardon me. :)

I'd love a JRuby akin to JPython - i.e. the so-called ""100% pure java""
implementation !


Bill