On 11/10/2012 11:03 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
It is too much imo.. Clojure->java -> c++
i would just write C++ code
The API is either Java or C++ or .NET. I agree that no sane person would go Clojure->Java->C++ :) Clojure would provide the option of interfacing natively the Java API, without having to write Java. But then I am left developing in Clojure, unless I decide to serve to Pharo via http/websockets. As I do not currently know Java or Clojure or C++, it currently seemed like learning Clojure as the optimal path of least resistance. That is with a belief that I could learn Clojure better, easier, faster than C++, or at least a sufficient subset of C++ to work with NB. If I could learn a subset of C++ sufficient to interface NB/Pharo with ForexConnect, then I would be happy to do so. http://forexforums.dailyfx.com/forexconnect/392705-forexconnect-api-subscrib... Especially if I had a roadmap to help provide me with said proficiency and that I could do so in equal or less time than spending with Clojure. It is a pragmatic decision. Long term I want to spend my time in Pharo and not in Clojure or C++, which is why I am attempting what at the moment requires the least effort or at least by best guess appears to be so. I have found nothing that I can program and interactively explore and experiment with better that Smalltalk/Pharo. It is most definitely my preference to do so. And I so greatly appreciate all of the efforts being made to make it an option more of the time. JavaConnect that Stéphane mentioned looks very interesting. I really appreciate your input into this. I can gauge the effort to learn Clojure and I find it reasonable. C++ seems from the outside to be more daunting. I could be wrong. Let me know if you have a different opinion. Thanks. Jimmie