You are not alone in your perception of Java. Um...I can say this because I've never learned Java and have little knowledge of JavaScript. This alone qualifies me as an expert in these subject areas. ;-}
However, if Caja provides more security, we should at least look at it. In my experience, code becomes stable and reliable after the third rewrite. It's the issue of security vs. convenience: you can't have both. There is much good JS code in Tahoe-LAFS. But as in any large project, there is probably code that needs to be examined for its utility and "currentness". This rarely happens when programmers are under a deadline (read: 1.9.0). Paraphrased quote from Albert Einstein: "Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.[1]" Ted [1] http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Zooko O'Whielacronx <zo...@zooko.com>wrote: > Dear Kevin: > > Your letter fills me with internal conflict! > . > . . > Zooko > > [1] > http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/trunk/docs/quickstart.rst > _______________________________________________ > tahoe-dev mailing list > tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org > http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev >
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
