Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language)

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

Yes, that's probably a more accurate characterization. But if Sun Java 
is essentially equal to "Java" (I don't know about any other major 
implementations) then - as a language - the libraries are essentially 
part of it. People tend to ignore any distinction between a "Language 
Standard" and whatever they get with their compiler. In the absence of a 
competing implementation, for any practical purposes, the compiler *is* 
the standard.

Ada would be in the same ballpark if, for example, Gnat were the only 
compiler out there with any significant user base. Then the Gnat 
libraries would effectively be "part of the language" and anyone using 
Ada would likely be familiar with them and could count on their presence 
anywhere that Ada was in use. But clearly, that is not the case.

MDC

James Rogers wrote:
> 
> I would rephrase that. Java standard libraries do not exist due to the 
> intrinsic nature of the Java language. They exist because Sun Microsystems
> has poured millions of dollars into the development of Java standard
> libraries.
> 
> While Java is a very useful tool, it is good to remember that Java is
> owned by Sun. It is a proprietary product. Just ask Microsoft, who
> recently paid Sun $700,000,000.00 in the settlement of a lawsuit
> regarding Java.
> 
> Jim Rogers


-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: m   o   d   c @ a   m   o   g
                    c   n   i       c   .   r

     "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat.
     Its the FAT that makes you look fat."

         --  Al Bundy

======================================================================