well, if so, that is hardly the fault of the language or the spec itself, is
it?
think of C++, a great basic concept (the core language!) which was heavily
"fragmented"
by the different and often contradicting concepts of the various tool
vendors, because
there is no such thing like a spec for the whole of it. languages like that
do not consist of the
some 40 keywords that may (or may not...) be the same on different
systems/platforms.
it's the tools, libraries and frameworks that count. and the missing
compatibility there made
porting of code a pain and most of the time not "porting" but
"re-developing".
in that respect JAVA was the first serious attempt (while far from beeing
perfect!) to try
to come up with a spec that is - at least to a certain level - the same on
all HW and SW platforms,
and that without any vendor lock in. you are free to choose from a multitude
of commercial
and free tools. If some (!) of them don't comply, so be it - choose the
one's that do. 
you can't force anyone to comply with standards, but does that mean
standardization is bad?
and after all, this is a JAVA list, so naturally the people here are fond of
it. Personally I would
not prowl around on .net lists pointing out how dislikeable that stuff is
;o) I just like freedom of
choice and the ability of relatively easy porting which is - at least at the
moment - unparalleled.
cheers

> Have you seen some of the third party vendor does not fully comply with
> the Java spec ?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 12:30 PM
> To: jdjlist
> Subject: [jdjlist] RE: Write Once, Run Anywhere - yes
> 
> 
> hi there!
> as it was one of my postings that greg was quoting and which made him tell
> his personal experiences with porting of C/C++ code in the first place,
> 
> I just have to say briefly: I'm with you, greg ;o)
> 
> and one more thing: I managed to accumulate 16 programming languages since
> I
> started on the C64 some years ago... of course not all of them I used to
> the
> extent to which I did use C/C++ 
> and java. but none - including C/C++ with various standard libraries, ANSI
> conformity and the like - ever came close to the ease of deploying java
> apps
> on any plattform. it does not work in 100% of the cases, agreed. but
> better
> to have it work in 95% of the cases out of the box without *any* changes
> than hassling around with recompilation (be there standardized libraries
> or
> not - i only say: different primitive type sizes, memory models etc...)
> and
> the java platform does of course have the one or the other bug (see the
> recent postings about CSS/JEditorPane...) but which complex piece of
> software doesn't? and at least the sun-people talk about "bugs" and not 
> "issues" like some other well-known software vendor... ;o) cheers
> 
> > OK, Lai.
> >  
> > *sigh*
> >  
> > DO check your earlier post from Wednesday, June 18, 2003 11:31 PM,
> > PLEASE...(Hint: scroll down the page, read from the bottom...)
> >  
> > You were not talking about Java. You were talking about C/C++ and *my* 
> > alleged ability (or lack thereof, according to you) to use C utilities 
> > (like
> > autoconf) and port C code (like your favorite SDL library) and how 
> > easy it is (according to you) to port the aforementioned C code.  You 
> > also motioned, I believe, that it takes a good programmer to paint a 
> > good picture (with C,
> > I presume), alleging that I am not one of these exalted master-painters
> > (which, if I may point out,  I never claimed to be in the first place,
> > just
> > giving one particular anecdotal C developer story from 3 years ago)
> >  
> > Ahhhh.... for me to point out to you what you just said is plain 
> > embarrassing...
> >  
> > <unfounded assumption>
> > you really underestimate by Java knowledge
> > </unfounded assumption>
> >  
> > I would *never* (and I have not) said such a thing, or anything that 
> > can be interpreted (to my knowledge) in this fashion... Do, please 
> > quote which part
> > of my post(s) made you think that?
> >  
> > <random snip>
> > those really expert might laughing loudly.
> > </random snip>
> >  
> > Yes, we are.
> >  
> > Greg
> >  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lai Kok Cheong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 7:03 PM
> > To: jdjlist
> > Subject: [jdjlist] RE: Write Once, Run Anywhere - yes
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> >             I'm not a C or C++ enthusiast.I choose the language based 
> > of the purpose of the project.Of course my personal preferences would 
> > be Java.If not for sure I would not join the mailing list.
> >  
> >             
> >  
> > If I may be permmited to point out:
> >  
> > 1) you have no idea what caused those compile errors
> > Lets be professional  on this matter.If you think my wording sound like
> a
> > personal attack to someone, I'm sorry. But to clear the cloud, you
> really
> > underestimate by Java knowledge though I would not say I'm expert since
> it
> > would sound like too snobbish , and those really expert might laughing
> > loudly.
> >  
> >  
> >              
> >  
> > 2) you have never seen that code
> >  
> > Java code ? Come on man.I have use Java for a very long time. Though I 
> > might not be a guru , but by no means the experiences count.
> >  
> > I have seen someone said  the code is not portable and complaining 
> > here and there but in reality they did not  stick to the Java way of 
> > writing code.
> >  
> > The strength of java lies in Interface and abstract class, though some 
> > java critique might say the other way around.
> >  
> > What I wanted to point out though using C as exemplarily , is to use 
> > the method that mades the language portable.
> >  
> > I don't want to use another language examples again  but I really 
> > tempt to.To an extend, you could write a portable asm code !
> >  
> > Just need to learn how to do the nice thing.
> >  
> > But of course if you're talking to Thread implementation, I can't help 
> > you here.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Look at the Weblogic way of implementing portable code for is apps 
> > server ( I use it for example and I didn't receive any pay from them 
> > ;-)). In windows
> > it have .DLL in Solaris .so ...
> >  
> > And also for Postgresql JDBC library.Try compiling the source from 
> > Linux and windows.And you'll see what I mean.
> >  
> > And for jdbc bugs, I do aggress to some extend the platform specific 
> > code was not implement properly.That in turns the bug submerge.
> >  
> > Writing a portable code is not a easy task.You need to know which  
> > portion of logic/module is a platform specific one and segregate it.
> >  
> > Maybe there is a lack of a blueprint from Sun itself.But as you go on 
> > , you will definitely have your own set of unofficial .20 cents tips.
> >  
> >              
> >  
> >  
> > 3) if you like to use C so much, why on Earth do you bother us nice 
> > Java folks? To throw a cold water for those like to throw a flame war 
> > ;-)
> >  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Nudelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:02 AM
> > To: jdjlist
> > Subject: [jdjlist] RE: Write Once, Run Anywhere - yes
> >  
> > Well, it's only Thursday, but if it's flame war you want, let the 
> > games begin!!
> >  
> > <personal attack>
> > That's if you donno how to use make and autoconf utility ?
> > </personnal attack>
> >  
> > If I may be permmited to point out:
> >  
> > 1) you have no idea what caused those compile errors
> > 2) you have never seen that code
> > 3) if you like to use C so much, why on Earth do you bother us nice Java
> > folks?
> >  
> > <blanket statement>
> > One of the nice example is SDL library.The library could compile 
> > nicely in both windows and linux.Who say C++ is not portable ? 
> > </blanket statement>
> >  
> > I esp. like the "*could* compile nicely" ... that is a nice touch! 
> > hahahahha
> >  
> > <hiku.beautiful imagery>
> > Is depend on how the programmer paint the picture.A bad and 
> > unexperienced painter would made a bad painting.... </hiku.beautiful 
> > imagery>
> >  
> > programmer paints
> > seeplus plus
> > white lotus
> > delicate petals
> > stinking bog
> >  
> >  
> > Hiku War! Hiku War!
> >  
> > HAHAHAHAHAHA
> >  
> > Greg
> >  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lai Kok Cheong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 11:31 PM
> > To: jdjlist
> > Subject: [jdjlist] RE: Write Once, Run Anywhere - yes
> > That's if you donno how to use make and autoconf utility ? One of the 
> > nice example is SDL library.The library could compile nicely in both 
> > windows and linux.Who say C++ is not portable ?
> >  
> > Is depend on how the programmer paint the picture.A bad and 
> > unexperienced painter would made a bad painting....
> >  
> >  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Nudelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:57 PM
> > To: jdjlist
> > Subject: [jdjlist] RE: Write Once, Run Anywhere - yes
> >  
> > <snip good stuff>
> > did anyone ever try to "port" (hahaha...) even a simple C/C++ 
> > app from one platform to another which was not explicitely 
> > designed for this (ANSI C/C++, only standard libraries which are 
> > not very powerful...and even then: some primitive types are of different
> 
> > sizes on almost every compiler, and not all developers are aware of the 
> > "sizeof" 
> > operator...), let alone a GUI app or programs that use 
> > a lot of networking code or the like? 
> > </snip good stuff> 
> > Yeah, I tried that once... I wrote a simple 2000 line program in M$FT
> > Visual
> > C++ (worked fine) and tried to make it run on Unix.  The first thing I 
> > C++ got
> > >from gcc was 37 compile errors... You will never have this happen 
> > >with
> > Java.
> > Java is a much nicer environment to play with.  Automatic garbage 
> > collection, interfaces and full OO design features, decent standard 
> > libs, automatic memory management, and if you know the language fairly 
> > well, you can, in most instances, write very fast/efficient code 
> > without making it unreadable.  Yeah, Java needs a little tweaking now 
> > and then.  Big deal!! That's what keeps me employed. Oh, eah, and did 
> > I mention, I never had a single javac fail with 37 compile
> > errors for a working program? 
> > Maybe someday M$FT.NET's code portability will catch up to Java.  For
> now,
> > given the M$FT strategy of exlusivitiy, there is simply no way for that
> to
> > happen.  They make the $ in M$FT by being an exclusive monopoly.
> > Greg 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk 
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To 
> > unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk
> > 
> 
> -- 
> +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more  http://www.gmx.net +++
> Bitte l�cheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
> unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk
> 

-- 
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more  http://www.gmx.net +++

Jetzt ein- oder umsteigen und USB-Speicheruhr als Pr�mie sichern!


---
You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk

Reply via email to