Re: [CfP] 2nd Post-Java Workshop

[Daniel Weinreb <address@hidden>]

Pascal Costanza wrote:

>
> We selected dynamicity as required by the AmI vision as the common theme
> of the workshop,

If I may make a suggestion: if the theme of your workshop is languages 
that are
"dynamic", I suggest that you might want to make some attempt to explain
what "dynamic" means.  My own attempts to find out from the MIT Dynamic
Languages Group, and from the authors of Dylan ("DYnamic LANguage"),
what "dynamic" means as an adjective modifying "language", have not been
very successful.  I get very, very different answers from different sources.

I also have a question. Is there something I can read that would explain
to me why doing "ambient intelligence" really requires a different language?
The reason I ask is that the cost of building systems in new languages is
extremely high, if you intend the systems to be actually deployed in
mission-critical situations for long periods of time.  (If you're just 
doing a
research prototype, the cost is a lot lower.)  Therefore, it's quite 
important
to demonstrate a very significant benefit for using a new language.  I'd be
very interested to read something that would explain enough about
"ambient intelligence" (or some aspect of it), and enough about what we
know about how to implement it, that would justify that claim that it's 
worth
the cost of a new langauge (or even a language whose design isn't new, but
for which general industry acceptance has not yet taken place).

Thank you.
-- Dan