On Monday, 17 December 2012 at 07:56:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2012 08:39:56 deadalnix wrote:
On Monday, 17 December 2012 at 07:27:49 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> On Monday, December 17, 2012 08:24:27 deadalnix wrote:
>> On Monday, 17 December 2012 at 00:57:30 UTC, Walter Bright
>>
>> wrote:
>> > It doesn't hide the source in any effective way. There are
>> > enough Java byte code => source translators around to
>> > prove
>> > that. It only takes one such tool to exist (and it's
>> > especially
>> > easy to create such a tool given D being open source).
>>
>> Oh, so that's why java is never used in any company !
>
> Java is used quite heavily by companies.
No it isn't, because they are afraid of bytecode decoders like
jad or JD.
There may very well be companies which avoid it because of
that, but I don't
see how you can possibly think that Java isn't used heavily in
the corporate
world, since it is.
OK, before I'll drive you crazy, I know that (and I
professionally wrote quite a lot of java myself). Java is one of
the most used language in companies.
But it seems that explaining it the forward classic way do not
work, so I try another strategy : maintain the opposite point and
let people notice how dumb it is.
I hope the point is made by now.
