From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2002-09-28T00:10:33+09:00
Subject: Re: R (was: adding overload to ruby)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nikodemus Siivola" <tsiivola@cc.hut.fi>


>
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
>
> > of course. so we give anyone choice - write efficiently compiled or
> > easily extensible dynamic code. it is right thing (IMHO)
>
> What I'd *love* would be to keep ruby dynamic as it is, and have a
> statically typed language, call it R, with a ruby-like syntax for extension
> writing:  the two should be easily interoperable and have equivalent
> builtin classes.
>
> Now that Ruby >= (Smalltalk+Perl)/2, we need R >= (C+(C++)+Java)/3.
> A better C is what I want, I guess.
>
> Still Wishing,
>
>   -- Nikodemus

This is certainly an interesting idea.  If Ruby and R could be automatically
co-maintained, you'd really have something there.  R would have to be natively
compilable to be worth it though, but I'm sure you had that in mind.

Can't see it happening, though...

Gavin