Meh. Who cares what language it is done in. It isn't like they aren't all turing complete

The big differentiator between languages seems to be the libraries available, and since the project has got this far, it obviously doesn't have any issues with library availability.

_________________
Trying is the first step towards failure
b

If I write a game in MingW c++, I'll have to keep it open source. If I write a game in another C++ compiler, I'd have to pay upfront and probably pay royalties if I made any money. If I wrote a game in FreePascal, I'd be writing it in a free compiler with slightly less performance than MingW C++, but what with their modified LGPL agreement, the source code can be completely closed-source and proprietary, with no royalties, etc...beats the hell our of everything, perhaps!

http://www.mingw.org/wiki/FAQ#toc11

3 and a half years late and inaccurate.

Good times.

_________________
www.littlemonkey.co.nz

Thanks for the heads-up: "You as a software manufacturer are free to use the MinGW runtime in your proprietary and OpenSource software as you see fit." That's what I just pasted off that link; thanks again for setting me straight on that point. That word "proprietary" is a good word; I guess I read it a long time ago and didn't decipher the meaning of that word as "proprietary" == "closed_source", such as if they were both the first, second, third or whatever entries in a different enumeration.