On 25 May 2004 at 13:37, Christopher Brian Jack wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 May 2004, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > That is a shame. Clearly I don't agree with your reasoning, there is no > > evidence that any other language would not have similar or worse issues > > (consider the amount of time we would spend dealing with memory leaks > > and array overflows had we implemented in C++). As for focus, our > > Not to mention the issues with portability on a C/C++ implementation.
Issues with portability? If we were talking a GUI app I'd agree with you, but the core of freenet is basically a pure backend is it not? The only visible UI most of the time on Windows is a systray icon or the Web interface; the latter's retrieved via HTTP and will work with any browser on any OS, and the former is not something Java supports directly anyway, so displaying a suitable icon in a suitable background-tasks part of the UI is system dependent any way you slice it, causing exactly as many portability headaches in Java as it would in C or C++ -- maybe more since you probably have to wrestle with the hairy JNI to pull it off, rather than just having one, platform dependent #idfef-filled source file with the appropriate functions duplicated for all the different supported platforms. _______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
