From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,517611567e1815f2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bill@nospam
Subject: Re: Java momentum slowing ?
Date: 1999/05/09
Message-ID: <7h5ak3$2t8@drn.newsguy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 476017196
References: <372b0ec7.28153993@news2.ibm.net> <3728E60E.F789FD8@uq.net.au>
 <373612A6.3752CC19@Botton.com>
Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://www.newsguy.com]
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <373612A6.3752CC19@Botton.com>, David says...
 
>
>Java does not have a standard. It has a vendor.
>

This is funny. You are the same one who uses COM and DCOM and 
ActiveX, and all that windows specific stuff, dont't you? show us the
ISO standard for any of those. Show us the ISO standard for VB or Delphi
or Perl pr Pyhton or any of the zillion other technologies being used
everyday by millions of programmers. 

Just becuase there is no Java ISO or ANSI standard means very little.
It is a matter of time before this happens. Meanwhile, every one out
there uses the current Java packages just fine with no problem, as
long as one stays from any Java stuff from M$ one will be safe.

>You compile Python too. Python compiles to a byte code and then
>executes. You can even distribute the byte code just like Java and just
>run it :)
>

Yes, there are many things like these around. Isn't there also some sort
of Perl to java compiler in the works? The bottom line is that although
these are fun and interesting projects, the industry will by far stay with
using the Java language to generate byte code from.

>
>Java is not JDK. BTW you can compile Ada to bytecode and use all the JDK
>facilities just like Java. (See some examples on
>http://www.adapower.com/os)
>

Ada to Java technology has not taken of at all. It will interesting to
see how jGNAT (when it comes out to public) will change that. I think
it will, but to what extent, remains to be seen.  Again, I think the
industry as a whole will stick to Java as the source language to the JVM.

>
>Ada is a tool that when used properly leads to better implementations.
>If your design smells so does your code. The key is that Ada helps
>prevent human error unlike the C syntax of C/C++/Java, is easier reading
>and easier to maintain.
>

You can say that about C/C++, but you are really hand waving here when you
try to apply the same old tactics to Java.

Java has fixed many of those problems in C/C++.

Java is much better readable than C++ for example, Java has very strong
time checking, run-time checking, it is very well defined language.

It lacks some of the more advanced features that Ada had such as generics
and child packages, and it also lack some basic ones such as unsigned data
types and enumeration data types and sub ranges (very good things to
have) But other than that, it is pretty much a good language, and on
the other hand, it has things that Ada does not have, such as 
exception specification as part of the method, GC, dynamic loading
of classes, interfaces, javadoc, and I think a better and simpler
object model than Ada's, and is much more OO language than Ada is.
 
At the end of the day, one uses whatever language is best for the task
at hand.
 
>David Botton

Bill