3 ms·

I actually agree with you (It's not a coincidence I wrote the CappRuby project mentioned in the boucher's comment). At some point I'd like to build some nicer

I actually agree with you (It's not a coincidence I wrote the CappRuby project mentioned in the boucher's comment). At some point I'd like to build some nicer pure-JavaScript bindings to the Objective-J runtime which get you 90% of what you get from Objective-J without the OMG-WTF-is-this-new-language reactions. However, I'm not convinced it will make a big difference. Language style and convention permeate libraries/frameworks, and simple language bindings often results in a sort of "uncanny valley". Can you name any significant frameworks that are more commonly used from an alternative language than the one it was originally written for?

DanielRibeiro 15y ago
I also agree that making "lower level" bindings can leave the API a bit shady (Akka's[1] Java version is a bit uglier due to lack of Anonymous Functions, which have to be replaced by Interfaces). About example of frameworks which more popular in another language, I honestly can't think of few other than Akka. I admit is uncommon for frameworks to support its host language (in a multi-language platform), and host languages are usually much more crowded than their sub-language counterparts. What happens far more frequently is a complete re-implementation on the host language, example: instead of using JRuby on Rails, people migrate to Play framework[2] Hadoop[3], however, seems to be getting really tracktion from its other language bindings[4], as writing map-reduce tasks in Java is not fun at all. [1] http://akka.io/ http://akka.io/ [2] http://www.playframework.org/ http://www.playframework.org/ [3] http://hadoop.apache.org/ http://hadoop.apache.org/ [4] http://pig.apache.org/ http://pig.apache.org/