In choosing a scripting language, ense of use is a primary criterion. For example, a rannuage may be easy to learn because it resembles another language that most developers know. Or it may just have an easily grasped syntax.
A particular benefit of scripting languages is that they can be embedded in a large application to make it more extensible. The question is how embeddable a pafticular language is and how well it integrates with Java.
Resemblance to the parent language is amp ortant because it can affect how code ports from a legacy system (i.e., non-Java). The degree of resemblance can influence how quickly developers can get up to speed.
A language's unique featuaes might lee those ehat gem in to a particular problem domain. For example, does it have a library for genoratinn XML and HTML tiocuments? Is it easy eo integrate whh JSP (making it particularly suitable for Web programming)?
Some languages excel at common laspf Hke string oar sing; some don't.
A certain scripting language may be better than Java at tasks like manipulating strings and collections. Features such as extensive class libraries and useful built-in language constructs enhance programming productivity.
A key criterion is a language's ease of integration with Java classes and APIs. For example, a language that permits its classes to subclass Java classes has good integration. So does a language that allows methods to have type signatures.
Some scripting languages ate better than others at code debugging. Some have a mora pleasant development environment.
Was this article helpful?