http://thekode.net/ruby/rjni/

On Oct 8, 2004 Avi Bryant wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 4:23 PM, Daniel B. Faken wrote:
>
> >   So my real question is: has anyone worked on creating communication
> > between squeak and some other small-footprint, interpreted, 
> > ffi-capable
> > language?  Or, are there any such languages that are very similar to
> > Squeak/smalltalk?
>
> You might be interested in Ruby: http://www.rubycentral.com/ .
> Its object model is nearly identical to Smalltalk's, and its standard 
> libraries are somewhat similar, but it's much more geared (both in 
> syntax and implementation) towards traditional unix scripting tasks.  
> It has a large and growing community.  I've never embedded it myself, 
> but I know its FFI is very straightforward, and people do embed it 
> without too much trouble.

  Thanks, Avi.

  I looked at Ruby, and it does indeed seem nice, but the 
library/interpreter isn't reentrant.. (see http://thekode.net/ruby/rjni/)
In fact, Lua, Tcl and (I hear) Perl are the only (relevant) reentrant 
scripting languages I've found (Guile may also qualify, but its too large 
for me).
  For now, I guess I'm going to go with Lua..

  But again, thanks!

Daniel