Hi Cheong and all, I thought this was concluded last month - maybe you should take it off-line? Best Regards Lesetja
--- Lai Kok Cheong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > > --> There is.The ANSI C.But just that the vendor > never really stick into it. > There are now especially the opensource C++ advocate > try their best to > promote and use the correct way of solving the > portablity issue. > One fine example is the mysql.It could cross compile > on unix and linux and > even Windows.It not easy to write something that > could cross compile on more > than one platform unless you know what you should > do. > The same goes with java , just that the contract is > more stringent ( as > define and examplyfies by the Sun whilst in C++ is > a really free world. > > 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. > > --> both is about the same direction.The difference > is Sun really made an > effort for it. > > 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. > --> But there are situation that you won't know > until you tried it.It happen > especially using the library /app server which does > not explicitly state in > which respect it does not adhere to the standard and > why if so does not > comply with the standard. > > In addition, there are some naughty vendor which > though in the spec state > you should this and that , they just made an excuse > for the sake of > performance etc etc, and never comply it.In my > opinion the spec like ANSI C > and java spec, the vendor should stick on the core > and they could have a > different implementation. > As for the java spec, before is was release there > are a number of draft and > revision release.So won't be better if somehow the > vendor thing certain part > of the spec it not optimum or could be improvise, > should suggest and refine > the spec ? > > > > 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. > > --> That why Visual J++ and it son C# is born. > So it end of a similar fate like C++ just that if > scored better ;-) > > > Regards, > Kok Cheong > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com --- You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sys-con.com/fusetalk
