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, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dc94fe39f71093ec X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Re: The revolution will not be standardized Date: 1999/12/15 Message-ID: <838mhs$cii$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 561034186 References: <82p7hu$l1q$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <82ppc9$1u6$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <385252E8.FF140CD2@acenet.com.au> <8333q3$9rh$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8335ip$b8f$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38561D9A.70B61403@acenet.com.au> <835ukh$uiv$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net> <385685B2.7E341C32@quadruscorp.com> <3856d861.30417176@news.netidea.com> <3856EA29.7B4C0A95@quadruscorp.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x24.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Dec 15 18:27:15 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.6 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 1999-12-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <3856EA29.7B4C0A95@quadruscorp.com>, "Marin D. Condic" wrote: > The "language war" I refer to is the one that seems to get started up > here occasionally concerning defining terminology. Personally, I may > prefer not to spend too much time trying to get a consensus going on > what constitutes a "Standard" because I think I'll know one when I see > one. When I look at the ARM, I see something with a relatively high > level of standardization. Micro$oft Visual Basic on the other hand, > has a relatively low level of standardization. (I can't count on what > it contains from one moment to the next.) Right. And the Windows API I'd say is even lower, because you can't count on it even between releases, and if you are a competitor you *can* count on it changing to hose you. What I see is Sun positioning themselves where they *could* also do that if they so choose. To try and drag this back to my original point, I think lack of open standardization has just doomed Java. Perhaps it isn't obvious from external signs right now, but a little knowledge of history will make it quite clear. (If you don't buy my argument, go read "The Last Dinosaur and the Tarpits of Doom", particularly the "Historical Detour: The Open Standards Steamroller" and "Microcomputers: The Valley that Time Forgot" sections, at http://members.tripod.com/adrianomerlotto/docs/lastdino.html ) Anyway, *given* that Java is doomed, wouldn't it be a good idea to be positioning Ada as the alternative? The language itself is nearly as portable, in some cases moreso. The portable API functionality is a bit lacking, but certianly no moreso than any of the other alternatives. -- T.E.D. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.