Gravis I agree with you that there is no reason for anger here. It seems there was some miscommunication here and if I have in any way offended you then I am sorry.
I know that compile time gives better speed than runtime execution, but i want to get a pie and eat it too. And yes I know it is not gonna be easy.
With the support of other languages the epiphany processors would get even a bigger interest in programming communities.
Erlang was also promised in kickstarter, so there is a question how will the virtual machine be implemented.
For java you could go with gcj, but development has stalled years ago and the support for java is even considered to be dropped from gcc, so the sumatra project is the best contender for java implementation.
If there were support for Java virtual machine on epiphany cores, then you could use Jython and JRuby and also Php (Quercus) on JVM. And maybe you could than use Hadoop, Swift ... etc.
The main reason is that when you get a critical mass of programmers on your side, you can move mountains (virtually you can).
Even if you never venture in the land of scripting languages, you do want them to come to epiphany cores, if you want parallella to succeed.
As I look at parallella I see that there could be a lot of potential in many different directions and I am happy that adapteva has implemented gcc for epiphany cores, but there could be even more ...
over9000 - There definitely needs to be some abstraction between average developer and the epiphany cores.
Some dynamic assignment to epiphany cores with some worker queue would be better than statically assigning their usage.
There is one more advantage of an IDL is it forces a programmer to think in a way it utilizes the hardware more optimally and at the same time it can even eliminate some usage that could be erroneous.
Epiphany core is like a raw diamond, which will have to be shaped and polished with lots and lots of good code. So we need a lot of good programmers.