From: junderdown@... (Jason Underdown) Date: 2002-08-27T06:40:28+09:00 Subject: Re: Distributed Object Container "Gavin Sinclair" wrote in message news:<000201c24d03$2caa8ad0$0c6332d2@nosedog>... > > Good question. Here's my take. > > J2EE - more specifically, EJB - enables those nice things like pooling, > transactions, caching, security, persistance (it may provide more or less than > this ;). You're asking if we can make Ruby do the same, somehow. > > The problem is, Ruby is analogous to *Java* (a computer programming language), > not *EJB*, which is essentially a *standard* which is more to do with services > that *application servers* provide rather than a programming language. The > only reason it has come about is because Sun has sat down with IBM, Oracle, > etc., and nutted out a standard so that EJBs can be deployed on all these > different application servers. This is the benefit of Sun controlling Java - > they have the muscle and the organisation to create these agreements at a high > corporate level. Yes, you are right, J2EE is just a standard implemented by several app server vendors. But why couldn't we adapt the J2EE standard so that something like it could be implemented in Ruby? Corporate backing would be helpful, but I don't see it as necessary. > > This is why I say to myself: Java is a good environment; it needs a good > language. I agree. > And it can't really be done in Ruby. My hope is than within two years Ruby > code can be compiled into JVM byte-code (via Parrot?) so that the J2EE platform > can be used in Ruby, Python, Perl, ... > > Gavin Why can't it be done in Ruby??? The main obstacle as I see it is coming up with a workable 'component' model. Obviously because Ruby is an interpreted language, these would not be bytecode components let alone binary components, but I think the word component is still applicable here.