3 ms·

To save anyone the trouble, this project is totally empty yet. It doesn't say anything about the ability of the owner to port F# to the JVM, but just know that

To save anyone the trouble, this project is totally empty yet. It doesn't say anything about the ability of the owner to port F# to the JVM, but just know that it is just a readme, three almost empty java classes, and the beginning of an ANTLR parser. So to answer other questions here, you can't even compare it to F# on Mono. F# on Mono works perfectly. The F# compiler and runtime is huge, and getting to parity will probably take at least a year to a very dedicated team.

quasque 14y ago
Perhaps of more interest is Frege, which is basically Haskell for the JVM. Seems to be coming along nicely: https://github.com/Frege/frege https://github.com/Frege/frege
- octo_t 14y ago
  surely you could just run lljvm on the llvm IR that ghc emits and have haskell code on your JVM?
  - th0ma5 14y ago
    could you get the kind of adhoc library interop you get with other on-the-jvm languages like this with llvm?
    - carterschonwald 14y ago
      probably not if you did it this week :) That said, there is some very interesting work going on towards having a sane call out to JVM / .net code from haskell, though nothing will realistically be in a truly usable for in the next 12-18th months
- voxfrege 14y ago
  I am not so sure if Frege would be of interest for people that look for an impure, strict language. A better fit for that would be Yeti. And assuming that porting a language that is so deeply rooted in the .NET world like F# is very difficult, my guess is that going with Yeti and thus fully embracing the JVM will be a better choice. The more so as one could do this right now.