on 6/26/03 8:03 AM David N. Welton wrote: > Glen Stampoultzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>Yes. As dogmatic as Sun has been about "pure" Java it's still a >>success factor in the adoption of Java. There's still no other >>platform out there that makes it as easy as Java to write for >>multiple platforms. > > > Errr... really?
Glen is talking about the JVM, I suspect, more than the java language. This is in line with things like Jython and PHP5 being all compiled to java bytecode. It is even more so in .NET where the CLI virtual machine has been designed to be similar to a modern high-end processor, not as a microwave oven microcontroller one (as, unfortunately, it is the case with java, where the JVM architecture sucks ass). And exactly for this reason, if Mono is successful and doesn't get locked by Microsoft legal battles and Sun doesn't open up the JVM, we'll simply write a compiler from JVM to CLI and simply mix the best of both worlds, escaping, at least, vendor lockin from the JVM part.... and hopefully removing some of that "holy WORA" syndrome that is really stopping people from thinking about the fact that diversity is good for you and doesn't necessarely prevent portability. BTW, Glen, HTTPd is written in C and it's *by far* more portable than any java program out there. At the same time, the amount of work done to allow this portability is impressive, while, compiling for a JVM, gets you instant portability and almost no cost. -- Stefano. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
