2 ms·
I know it's only a fairly irrelevant detail in the post, but this resonated strongly with me: PHP. But that, unfortunately, they just couldn't stand working on
by pmjordan 17y ago
I know it's only a fairly irrelevant detail in the post, but this resonated strongly with me:
PHP. But that, unfortunately, they just couldn't stand working on. The PHP days were probably the lowest point, judging by how bedraggled they seemed.
- strlen 17y agoI am curious, wasn't AppJet JVM based (using Rhino for Javascript)? Why couldn't they offer support for Ruby via JRuby? Would have been a language that's both much more pleasant to work than PHP and has great traction with web developer community. Was there a switch away from JVM/Rhino to a C/V8 based solution?
- pmjordan 17y agoI hope you don't expect me to have that information, although it's reasonable to assume that if their first attempt was purely javascript based, that they had a certain intellectual investment into the language. I'm not sure what would have been gained by switching to Ruby. PHP is problematic in many ways, not only language but also runtime and lack of asynchronous I/O.
- strlen 17y agoDidn't expect you to have that information, was just more general posturing. I complete agree with you on PHP. Ruby would have been useful in that it runs very well on the JVM (their product runs Javascript in a JVM container), but is pretty popular amongst web developers (you could also argue, with the right kind of web developers; PHP developers prefer to just use shared hosting in any case).