I only now had the time to look at Curtis' document (http://
) submitted at
the end of August - I really like it and many of the issues agree
perfectly with those in one of my earlier postings.
I am still having second thoughts about the possible return of such an
investement and would like to raise a few fundamental questions,
hoping not to upset anyone:
1) From the main IJ newslist my experience is that the vast (and
growing) majority of postings deals with macros of some sort. Are
there enough IJ users that still write Java code and would possibly
benefit from an improved API?
2) Maintaining backward compatibility and keeping the IJ community on
board has been a central issue in this list from the beginning. But
assuming the API is not so important, would it be conceivable to write
a radically new API together with a scripting layer that emulates IJ's
existing functionality? I.e, to keep the crowd happy while at the same
time providing a clean foundation for further development?
3) I am reading about support for more (unsigned) primitive data
types, use of generics etc. I consider myself a Java person, but this
is where Java is particularly bad at, not to talk about some notorious
performance issues. How important is Java in this context?