Exactly. Funny story there . . . we started our JVM language as interpreted, more or less, and ended up having to write our own not-so-great debugger for it.

Exactly. Funny story there . . . we started our JVM language as interpreted, more or less, and ended up having to write our own not-so-great debugger for it. We decided to compile it down to native java bytecode precisely so we could take advantage of all the native Java tools that work with standard Java-like classes, such as debuggers, profilers, and even just stack traces. That approach doesn't work so well for languages that don't match Java relatively closely (i.e. stack traces in Closure are, I understand, pretty horrific), but for our language it's turned out pretty well.