Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What decade is this?

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Christopher Nelson

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 6:34:02 AM9/12/06
to
The comipany that gave birth to Java and nurtured Tcl is in the news
today:

"Sun has thrown some corporate weight behind ... dynamic languages
..."
(http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/12/068253)

Weird.

suchenwi

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 7:23:51 AM9/12/06
to

Christopher Nelson schrieb:

There's one reply remembering us:
"Too young to remember Tcl/Tk at Sun(Score:2)
by Richard W.M. Jones (591125) <rich&annexia,org> on Tuesday September
12, @07:15AM (#16087523)
(http://www.annexia.org/)
Well, it's hardly the first time that Sun has got involved in
scripting/dynamic languages.
Back in 1994, Sun hired the core developer behind Tcl/Tk [www.tcl.tk],
and asked him to form a team around the language / graphical toolkit.
The toolkit was very widely used and quite promising (for the time),
but it languished at Sun and eventually they dumped it. "

Neil Madden

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 8:22:00 AM9/12/06
to

Weird, indeed, given that they just let go of the Self team:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/self-interest/message/1943

-- Neil

Bryan Oakley

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 10:33:22 AM9/12/06
to

... which -- to me -- means that Sun isn't throwing "weight behind ...
dynamic languages", it is merely jumping on the Ruby bandwagon. They
don't care about dynamic languages in general, just Ruby in particular.

Bless 'em anyway. Anything to keep Sun from becoming another footnote in
history is fine by me.

Donal K. Fellows

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 10:42:32 AM9/12/06
to
Bryan Oakley wrote:
> .... which -- to me -- means that Sun isn't throwing "weight behind ...
> dynamic languages", it is merely jumping on the Ruby bandwagon. They
> don't care about dynamic languages in general, just Ruby in particular.
>
> Bless 'em anyway. Anything to keep Sun from becoming another footnote in
> history is fine by me.

Yeah, and I've got a soft spot for them as we got some very nice things
out of them (especially the Tcl_Obj, the bytecode engine, and our i18n
support).

Donal.

Cameron Laird

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 12:10:07 PM9/12/06
to
In article <ee6h11$tvt$1...@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>,
Donal K. Fellows <donal.k...@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
.
.

.
>Yeah, and I've got a soft spot for them as we got some very nice things
>out of them (especially the Tcl_Obj, the bytecode engine, and our i18n
>support).
>
>Donal.

... and a lot of the unglamorous work for Tk portability.

Donal K. Fellows

unread,
Sep 12, 2006, 2:50:32 PM9/12/06
to
Cameron Laird wrote:
> .... and a lot of the unglamorous work for Tk portability.

Oh yes. I definitely appreciate that. It's so good that I forget we've
got it. :-)

Donal.

0 new messages