On Monday, 17 December 2012 at 08:34:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/16/2012 11:24 PM, 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 !
Yes, I know you're being sarcastic.
But consider that Amazon uses Java heavily. They don't care
about source obfuscation, because they don't ship source code
or .class libraries. They don't sell Java code at all. Source
obfuscation is irrelevant to them.
More seriously, I understand that in some cases, di are
interesting. Mostly if you want to provide a closed source
library to be used by 3rd party devs.
But that is a use amongst many, and is irrelevant for an huge
amount of companies. Many don't ship code because they are
providing service (google, facebook, amazon, etc . . .) or
because they deliver the final binary to the customer (most
software you can buy are delivered that way).
