* The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) @ 1997-08-25 0:00 Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-26 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Bertrand Meyer @ 1997-08-25 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In my message on the "second historic mistake" I had written that, whereas Eiffel has successful commercial applications approaching the million lines of source code, there was no comparable experience in Java outside of applets and of the Java tools themselves. A few weeks ago there was an interesting exchange: [Ken Garlington] !!! The discussion is interesting in that Meyer !!! (a) criticizes Java for not being used on large !!! projects (whatever happened to unfair criticism !!! of new languages? [Robert Dewar] > > Hmmm! I guess he does not consider the Corel office > > suite large. Or perhaps simply does not know about it. [Bertrand Meyer] > It would be difficult not to know about it, > as it gets hammered over and again by Java proponents > (along with Java tools themselves) as the example of > completed Java development, to the extent that one > may wonder whether there is any other. It's really fascinating to read this again a month later, with the recent announcements -- widely reported by the press -- that Corel is dropping its Java strategy altogether. So much for the showcase success of the century... -- Bertrand Meyer, President, ISE Inc. ISE Building, 2nd floor, 270 Storke Road, Goleta CA 93117 805-685-1006, fax 805-685-6869, <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> http://www.eiffel.com, with instructions for download ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-25 0:00 The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bertrand Meyer @ 1997-08-26 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus 1997-08-26 0:00 ` BruceMount ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Flavius.Vespasianus @ 1997-08-26 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <34023FC9.59E2B600@eiffel.com>, Bertrand Meyer <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> wrote: >So much for the showcase success of the century... Have you seen the computer game "Lemmings"? ------------------------------------------------ Doesn't the marketing person who decided "Windows 4.0" should be called "Windows '95" look really stupid right now? Home Page: http://home.att.net/~miano Home of the Delphi Component Writers' FAQ EMail Address: |m.i.a.n.o @ | |w.o.r.l.d.n.e.t . | |a.t.t .| |n.e.t | Full Name: ------------------- -J.o.h.n?M.i.a.n.o- ------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-25 0:00 The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-26 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus @ 1997-08-26 0:00 ` BruceMount 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> [not found] ` <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com> ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: BruceMount @ 1997-08-26 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Brett: >>From: "Brett J. Stonier" <bretts@brightwood.com> >>What's fascinating to *me* is how much time and energy Eiffel proponents >>spend attacking Java, instead of being content to use and offer this >>(supposedly) superior language that, if it is truely so much better, >>should win out in the end. As much as I wish it were true, the "better mousetrap" does NOT frequently win in the marketplace and I find it surprising that people still think it does. VHS out-marketed the technically superior Betamax. Mac were technically superior to Windows for years and lost the marketing wars. Objective-C is better than C++ and it lost the marketing wars. >>Is this "runner-up syndrome" (ala Burger King attacking McDonald's.... ...another good example. McDonalds is the unquestioned market leader. Does that mean the best food "won out"? I am particularly suspicious of anything that is totally hyped so that it is being sold as the cure-all. I get especially irritated when Sun (the proprietary owner of Java) run national ads saying "Java is open". No, Java is not an evil language. It has many improvements over C++. No, Eiffel is not a cure-all language either. However, I do feel that the Java hype machine has created a tidal wave out of very little water. As someone that has studied Marketing I can't help but be impressed, just as I'm impressed by the marketing prowess of Microsoft. But as a life-long technical person I can't help buy say "the inferior product is winning......again." Marketing, it seems, is a much stronger force than technical reasoning. How sad. --Bruce BruceMount@aol.com -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-26 0:00 ` BruceMount @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <JSA.97Aug28182029@alexandria.organon.com> [not found] ` <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bruce - I can certainly appreciate you opinion. Although I like playing with it and see promise for it, I, too, do not think Java to be the end-all, be-all of development tools. And, yes, Sun is overhyping it for the wrong reasons. And, yes, it can be frustrating when technically superior products (especially ones you have an interest in, like one in which you have programming experience) do not win out over inferior products that have better marketing. I have a good degree of programming experience in SQLWindows, for example. SQLWhat? "Oh, its like Powerbuilder or (shudder) VB, but much better." :-) Nowadays, its pretty much dead. :-( However, from a fairly unbias observer's standpoint on these Eiffel vs. Java threads, I am saying that the Eiffel proponents are taking the wrong approach. Most of the threads have been kicked off by posts by Meyer, who presents an arrogant, condescending attititude towards Java. When you insult Java like that you are insulting Java programmers and creating resentment towards yourself. I went into these posts fairly neutral, with a positive image of both Java and Eiffel, and came out turned off towards Eiffel. I believe this is the exact opposite of the effect that is desired. If this is the marketing approach that will be used, let's learn a bit from these technological history lessons everyone's been presenting, and seal the fate of Eiffel right now. Brett S. http://www.mtjeff.com/~calvin/devhbook ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <JSA.97Aug28182029@alexandria.organon.com>]
[parent not found: <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com> @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jay Martin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com> Jeff Kotula <jkotula@stratasys.com> writes: > I'm not saying that Eiffel advocates shouldn't tone down their > rhetoric, but the rest of us should probably open up a bit. We are, > after all, supposed to be engineers/scientists and remain free of > bias :) Sounds good to me. I note here that I really don't have a love affair with any programming language. Put another way, I feel they all suck one way or another and that they need to be evaluated for each context to see which one sucks the least for that context of use. I also favor (heresy of heresies) multi-language development in those (many, imo) cases where it makes sense. The thing that is annoying about these ultra-fanatical Eiffel people, isn't Eiffel - it _is_ a language that sucks less than many - it's that they basically have bought into their own rhetoric that Eiffel is the absolute paragon of perfection in PLs. IMO, there are many perspectives from which it is not even remotely close to this. Take expressivity for example. Compared to CL/CLOS, Eiffel is about as expressive as the original BASIC. /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jay Martin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 0 siblings, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jay Martin @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Jon S Anthony wrote: > > In article <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com> Jeff Kotula <jkotula@stratasys.com> writes: > > > I'm not saying that Eiffel advocates shouldn't tone down their > > rhetoric, but the rest of us should probably open up a bit. We are, > > after all, supposed to be engineers/scientists and remain free of > > bias :) > Sounds good to me. I note here that I really don't have a love affair > with any programming language. Put another way, I feel they all suck > one way or another and that they need to be evaluated for each context > to see which one sucks the least for that context of use. Seems reasonable. My "roots" are in "programming in the large with "non-brilliant programmers" so I prefer "anal", "hand holding", "strongly typed" and simple languages. Though I would love to see my "beliefs" challenged by say stellar improvements in productivity studies using more "loose" languages on projects consisting of say a few million lines of code and heh "room temperature" programming IQs. > I also > favor (heresy of heresies) multi-language development in those (many, > imo) cases where it makes sense. Multi-language development projects can be a pain and usually more languages means even more pain. > The thing that is annoying about > these ultra-fanatical Eiffel people, isn't Eiffel - it _is_ a language > that sucks less than many - it's that they basically have bought into > their own rhetoric that Eiffel is the absolute paragon of perfection > in PLs. I have never used Eiffel but it looks to be a very good language that has few compromises on "quality". > IMO, there are many perspectives from which it is not even > remotely close to this. Take expressivity for example. Compared to > CL/CLOS, Eiffel is about as expressive as the original BASIC. It seems to me if you are doing "prototypes", short lived programs and small programs, etc, then expressivity is a desirable feature. As you go into "a programming the large" situation, then "expressivity" has its costs. And it may just be my "roots" but "large" situations seem much more challenging and critical than "small programs" which can easily be dumped and rewritten. I guess I find "unscalable" programming in the small languages and programming philosophies less compelling than "large" ones. Jay ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jay Martin @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <34072C68.DAFB500E@earthlink.net> Jay Martin <jaymmartin@earthlink.net> writes: > Jon S Anthony wrote: > > > > Sounds good to me. I note here that I really don't have a love affair > > with any programming language. Put another way, I feel they all suck > > one way or another and that they need to be evaluated for each context > > to see which one sucks the least for that context of use. > > Seems reasonable. My "roots" are in "programming in the large > with "non-brilliant programmers" so I prefer "anal", "hand holding", > "strongly typed" and simple languages. Though I would love That's quite reasonable for that sort of situation. No argument. > to see my "beliefs" challenged by say stellar improvements in > productivity studies using more "loose" languages on projects > consisting of say a few million lines of code and heh "room > temperature" programming IQs. As you've pointed out in the past - even if this were true, the chance of getting verifying studies showing it is about as likely as being hit by a meteorite... > > I also > > favor (heresy of heresies) multi-language development in those (many, > > imo) cases where it makes sense. > > Multi-language development projects can be a pain and usually > more languages means even more pain. Yes, I know that's the traditional argument. But shoehorning inappropriate work into a language model not really supportive of it is even worse. Now, I don't claim you should have dozens of languages or something - but 2 (or maybe even three in some cases) is not that big of a deal. > > IMO, there are many perspectives from which it is not even > > remotely close to this. Take expressivity for example. Compared to > > CL/CLOS, Eiffel is about as expressive as the original BASIC. > > It seems to me if you are doing "prototypes", short lived programs > and small programs, etc, then expressivity is a desirable > feature. Absolutely. But the (IMO extreme) importance of this in prototypes (and prototypes /= final work) is largely unrecognized to the detriment of subsequent quality in the "manufactured" version. > As you go into "a programming the large" situation, then > "expressivity" has its costs. In general I think this is quite true. But I don't see this as being in any sort of conflict with my position. /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jay Martin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-09-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > productivity studies using more "loose" languages on projects > consisting of say a few million lines of code and heh "room temperature" > programming IQs. You mean an IQ of 70 (Fahrenheit) or 35 (Celsius) ? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wes Groleau, Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN USA Senior Software Engineer - AFATDS Tool-smith Wanna-be Don't send advertisements to this domain unless asked! All disk space on fw.hac.com hosts belongs to either Hughes Defense Communications or the United States government. Using email to store YOUR advertising on them is trespassing! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <JSA.97Aug28182029@alexandria.organon.com> [not found] ` <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com> @ 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Tim Ottinger @ 1997-09-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Not all brilliant people are always pleasant people, granted, and language wars are either dull or inflammatory, but let's not lose perspective. Meyer is brilliant. If you read his books or articles with your "language war filter" on full blast, you find that he has many wonderful ideas and a very solid foundation for his thoughts and even his stronger opinions. I learn something everytime I take a look at his Eiffel book. He did create a powerful construct in "design by contract". He did create a powerful language to support it. He's said more than once that DBC seems to him to be more important than all the rest of the OO-ness supported by modern OO languages. I'm sure that he's very proud of his accomplishments, and it's embittering to see language developers and users staying away in droves. I'm sure that Meyer has driven people away by some of his postings, and I'm sure that that's also a horrible shame. But people should try to separate their bias against the man from their bias against the ideas or products that he's developed. > > However, from a fairly unbias observer's standpoint on these Eiffel > vs. > > Java threads, > > More accurately, it's Eiffel vs. The World. > > I am saying that the Eiffel proponents are taking the > > wrong approach. Most of the threads have been kicked off by posts > by > > Meyer, who presents an arrogant, condescending attititude towards > Java. > > ^^^^^ > _anything_ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` not 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: not @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On 08/27/97, Fergus Henderson wrote: > >Objective-C was not better than C++. Objective-C was a basically >"Smalltalk in C": a dynamically typed OOP language embedded inside C. >In my humble opinion, this is not a good match. To the best of my >knowledge, Objective-C lacked static checking and was much less efficient >than C++. > I think that Objective-C from Stepstone permitted both static type checking and static binding as an option. Objective-C from NeXT permits static type checking. NeXT also introduced Objective-C "Protocols" which were used by Sun as a model for Java "Interfaces". In either case you can determine the "type" of an object without knowing it's class. Objective-C is somewhat slower than C++. I've seen empirical estimates that place the difference in the range of 10%. If you need that extra 10% performance, and you can design a nice efficient system and implement it successfully using C++, go ahead. Taligent had a lot of trouble with sytem design using C++. But maybe you can do it. Let me know how you make out after you've profiled your C++ code and you want to make some changes in the design in order to improve performance. You might find it's possible to arrive at a more efficient design, given the same resources, with a language that supports dynamic type checking, notwithstanding the overhead imposed by the run time environment. -- invert: umich.edu jdevlin insert: shift "2" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` not @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe [not found] ` <5u3o1n$hu5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger 1 sibling, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Richard A. O'Keefe @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes: >Objective-C was not better than C++. Well, it depends on what you mean by "better". - Cheaper to enter? Someone here wrote an Objective C compiler in a couple of months spare time several years ago. You got more OOP bang for the compiler development buck. - Compiler reliability? _Because_ the job of an Objective-C compiler is much much simpler than the job of a C++ compiler, you get rather more compiler reliability for the same level of investment. - Library design? The Objective-C libraries were designed with the language, just like Eiffel. Unfortunately, a split developed, with StepStone owning the original libraries, and other free libraries being developed, which eroded this benefit. - Better support for OOP? Objective-C provided things like save/load for objects. - Better support for evolutionary programming. The fact that Objective-C is dynamic and C++ is static is not an accident. Stroustrup was starting from a Simula background and trying to "sell" OOP to people who demanded "efficiency", which implies a static language. The designer of Objective-C was more concerned with long-span _maintenance_ costs and chose a design that he thought would reduce _that_: no good having a fast program if it is now far too expensive to make it do what you want. >Objective-C was a basically >"Smalltalk in C": a dynamically typed OOP language embedded inside C. >In my humble opinion, this is not a good match. Objective C _has_ changed, and there is a bit more static checkability than there used to be, but dynamicity was what the design was supposed to achieve. I imagine that _any_ level of dynamicity will be a poor match with C. Don't forget, Dylan was years in the future when ObjC was designed (:-). >To the best of my >knowledge, Objective-C lacked static checking and was much less efficient >than C++. "Much less efficient"? At what? It's possible to win all the battles and still lose the war. ObjC was designed to permit certain _kinds_ of efficiency (like code-sharing and development time) at the expense of others; C++ was designed to permit certain _kinds_ of efficiency (like run-time) at the expense of others. One could quite fairly say that ObjC dynamism doesn't encourage bloated programs the way that C++ templates do, and for the sizes of machines current when ObjC was designed, that was a major factor in over-all _system_ efficiency. (Why do I need to give a certain web browser 16Mb of memory? Amongst other things, because of OOP languages that _aren't_ dynamic. Why don't I use that browser on machine X? Because I only _have_ 16Mb on that machine, and the OS needs some of it.) Efficiency is a property of _programs_, not _languages_. I once had a Prolog program that ran faster than the Fortran program it replaced, and the Fortran compiler generated native code and the Prolog program didn't. Reason? Prolog had encouraged me to think in a way that suggested a far more efficient algorithm and made it easy for me to write that algorithm. Is there any evidence that _applications_ developed in Objective C in the NextStep environment are materially less efficient than similar applications developed in C++ for that or some other environment on the same hardware? -- Unsolicited commercial E-mail to this account is prohibited; see section 76E of the Commonwealth Crimes Act 1914 as amended by the Crimes Legislation Amendment Act No 108 of 1989. Maximum penalty: 10 years in gaol. Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/%7Eok; RMIT Comp.Sci. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5u3o1n$hu5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <5u3o1n$hu5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Nick Leaton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Nick Leaton @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) There is a large article in the Wall Street Journal on Java Dated 28th August -- Nick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe [not found] ` <5u3o1n$hu5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> @ 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger 1997-09-16 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1 sibling, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Tim Ottinger @ 1997-09-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > - Better support for OOP? > Objective-C provided things like save/load for objects. So you consider saving and loading to be an OO aspect of programming? That's very unusual. I don't consider this to be an OO aspect at all, but a general programming need. Moreover, from an OO perspective, I personally find it distasteful for business objects to have anyknowledge of presentation or persistence. This even further created confusion over the idea of save/load methods in objects being OOP. Finally, I can have save/load methods in objects if I really wanted to. What does Objective-C add to ease the burden and support the aftermarket? I actually don't know, so this is a chance to explain or evangelize. Care to comment? I'd love to hear your perspective. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger @ 1997-09-16 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-09-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > > - Better support for OOP? > > Objective-C provided things like save/load for objects. > Finally, I can have save/load methods in objects if I really wanted > to. What does Objective-C add to ease the burden and support the > aftermarket? I actually don't know, so this is a chance to explain or > evangelize. > > Care to comment? I'd love to hear your perspective. Since I don't know Objective-C, I may not be talking about the same thing. But since you posted to comp.lang.ada.... Ada has 'Read and 'Write functions predefined for everything. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wes Groleau, Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN USA Senior Software Engineer - AFATDS Tool-smith Wanna-be wwgrol AT pseserv3.fw.hac.com Don't send advertisements to this domain unless asked! All disk space on fw.hac.com hosts belongs to either Hughes Defense Communications or the United States government. Using email to store YOUR advertising on them is trespassing! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com> @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com>, Brett J. Stonier <bretts@brightwood.com> wrote: > >What's fascinating to *me* is how much time and energy Eiffel proponents >spend attacking Java, instead of being content to use and offer this >(supposedly) superior language that, if it is truely so much better, >should win out in the end. Is this "runner-up syndrome" (ala Burger >King attacking McDonald's, Pepsi attacking Coke, etc.?) What's the true >motivation here? That's exactly what it is. Java is what programmers are currently turning to in droves, and the Eiffel people are trying to turn some of that tide their way by highlighting what Eiffel does better than Java. I don't blame them. I happen to think their points are mostly right. They do tend to be a bit overexuberant at times, though. And by the way, there's certainly no reason to believe that Eiffel will win out in the end because it's better. It's going to take some careful marketing. >If you're trying to enlighten the world to the wisdom of Eiffel, you >should know that you're going about it the wrong way. The >self-rightous, condescending attitudes used to do it (like the above >gloating) have turned me off to Eiffel completely. I tend to agree with that. But if you get the opportunity, you should really give Eiffel a chance. It's a pretty good system. -PD -- -- Patrick Doyle doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Paul Johnson @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com>, bretts@brightwood.com says... >What's fascinating to *me* is how much time and energy Eiffel proponents >spend attacking Java, instead of being content to use and offer this >(supposedly) superior language that, if it is truely so much better, >should win out in the end. If you really think that the technically superior solution will always win, I suggest you read up on the history of technology. Some counter-examples are: VHS vs BETAMAX Decca vs LORAN IBM PC vs just about anything else. C++ vs Ada Paul. -- Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my opinions. | +44 1245 242244 +-----------+-----------------------------------------+ Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of little Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 2 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Paul Johnson wrote: > In article <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com>, bretts@brightwood.com > says... > > >What's fascinating to *me* is how much time and energy Eiffel > proponents > >spend attacking Java, instead of being content to use and offer this > >(supposedly) superior language that, if it is truely so much better, > >should win out in the end. > > If you really think that the technically superior solution will always > win, > I suggest you read up on the history of technology. Some > counter-examples > are: > > VHS vs BETAMAX > Decca vs LORAN > IBM PC vs just about anything else. > C++ vs Ada > > Paul. > > -- > Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my > opinions. | > +44 1245 242244 > +-----------+-----------------------------------------+ > Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of > little > Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. I never said *always*, but yes, it does help. What about the Japanese car companies of the 80s? However, that was not my main point, which is that the Eiffel supporters are making themselves out to be elitists and whiners. Do you think it would have helped Betamax to stamp their feet and yell "VHS sucks, we're better!" and "VHS tapes are only suitable for music videos!"? The problem here is that too many people already had VHS machines, and when the competition tells you what you just purchased is lousy (implying you must be a bit slow to have bought it in the first place) it only serves to make you dislike them and turn you off to their product. So, when Eiffel people say "Java is a toy", all they are doing is building resentment towards Eiffel, further sealing its fate. Brett P.S. Your C++ vs Ada example is purely subjective. P.P.S. I do really like your Zork reference, though. -- Brett S. http://www.mtjeff.com/~calvin/devhbook ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 2 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Paul Johnson said <<IBM PC vs just about anything else>> Another example where the techies think they know better than customers. If you don't understand why the IBM PC succeeded over what seem to you to be clearly technically superior alternatives, you just don't understand that market place! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Paul Johnson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.872791624@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu says... > >Paul Johnson said > ><<IBM PC vs just about anything else>> > >Another example where the techies think they know better than customers. >If you don't understand why the IBM PC succeeded over what seem to you >to be clearly technically superior alternatives, you just don't understand >that market place! I understand that marketplace perfectly well. I know the history of the IBM PC and its clones. I can see the logic of each decision which brought us to where we are now (me typing this on a P5-90 under Win95). That does not negate my point. If anything, it re-enforces it. I've talked to people about Eiffel, and then watched them go out and buy C++. And I understand their reasons perfectly well. Paul. -- Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my opinions. | +44 1245 242244 +-----------+-----------------------------------------+ Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of little Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 2 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jeff Brown @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <5u3co8$gtf$3@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>, paul.johnson@gecm.com (Paul Johnson) writes: > VHS vs BETAMAX ARHGGG!!!!! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-25 0:00 The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bertrand Meyer ` (2 preceding siblings ...) [not found] ` <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com> @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar ` (2 more replies) [not found] ` <JSA.97Aug26153546@alexandria.organon.com> 4 siblings, 3 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bertrand Meyer wrote: > > In my message on the "second historic mistake" I had > written that, whereas Eiffel has successful commercial > applications approaching the million lines of source > code, there was no comparable experience in Java outside > of applets and of the Java tools themselves. > > A few weeks ago there was an interesting exchange: > > [Ken Garlington] > > !!! The discussion is interesting in that Meyer > !!! (a) criticizes Java for not being used on large > !!! projects (whatever happened to unfair criticism > !!! of new languages? > > [Robert Dewar] > > > > Hmmm! I guess he does not consider the Corel office > > > suite large. Or perhaps simply does not know about it. > > [Bertrand Meyer] > > > It would be difficult not to know about it, > > as it gets hammered over and again by Java proponents > > (along with Java tools themselves) as the example of > > completed Java development, to the extent that one > > may wonder whether there is any other. > > It's really fascinating to read this again a month later, > with the recent announcements -- widely reported by the > press -- that Corel is dropping its Java strategy altogether. > > So much for the showcase success of the century... As I am sure you will hear, those reports were entirely inaccurate. What Corel dropped was the already doomed, regardless of language of development, approach of creating monolithic personal computer product suites for the consumer marketplace. In its place is a true network centric architecture in which servers provide the high volume memory and cpu cycles. This is an inevitable consequence of the economics of computing which is now playing out as the cost of communications decreases. Corel, along with most other players in the industry, are and will be using Java to implement that. As for the size of the products developed with Java so far I am sure the experience of my company is not unique in having built a working system of over 500K lines in less than 12 months (and it will be growing into a system of millions of lines over the next two years). This involved combining large modules (50K to 200K lines each) which successfully integrated with no serious failures even though the respective modules are all rather immature and barely out of beta (and sometimes not even that). Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred percent. jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` James P. White @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [not found] ` <34047A7D.62319AC4@eiffel.com> [not found] ` <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> 2 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) James White says <<What Corel dropped was the already doomed, regardless of language of development, approach of creating monolithic personal computer product suites for the consumer marketplace.>> doomed? how does Microsoft Office-97 NOT fit this description? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <34047A7D.62319AC4@eiffel.com>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <34047A7D.62319AC4@eiffel.com> @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Bertrand Meyer @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) James P. White wrote: [Quoting me] > > It's really fascinating to read this again a month later, > > with the recent announcements -- widely reported by the > > press -- that Corel is dropping its Java strategy altogether. > > > > So much for the showcase success of the century... [James P. White] > As I am sure you will hear, those reports were entirely inaccurate. The Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that Corel was "ditching" Java efforts. This has been criticized on some newsgroups as being exaggerated. But here is the report from Computer Reseller News in Techwire (see http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/aug/0817corel.html for the full text): OTTAWA -- Corel has rethought its Java strategy, according to sources briefed by the company. Now, the plan is to put the bulk of application logic on servers, which would then serve up what's needed to the client, whether that client is a PC or a Network Computer, said Amy Wohl, president of Wohl Associates, a Narberth, Pa., researcher. Previously, the company was rewriting its bread-and-butter drawing and productivity applications in Java. But that effort has been delayed significantly. Corel now plans to use home-grown technology, code-named Remagen [...] There still will be a lower-end Java suite for NCs due in October, Wohl noted, but the thrust has shifted considerably to the enterprise. The word "altogether" in "Dropping its Java strategy altogether" was based on the initial press reports and may turn out to be too strong. The jury is still out as to how "altogether" the drop is, although in the software business "delayed significantly" is often a euphemism for something more fatal. The point of my note (not a flame, just a reporting of fact) stands: that the great showcase of Java triumph, reported everywhere including in these newsgroups, was perhaps advertized a bit prematurely. See also: http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_799.html. -- Bertrand Meyer, President, ISE Inc. ISE Building, 2nd floor, 270 Storke Road, Goleta CA 93117 805-685-1006, fax 805-685-6869, <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> http://www.eiffel.com, with instructions for download ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Mike Coffin ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Matthew S. Whiting @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bertrand Meyer wrote: > > The Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that Corel was "ditching" > Java efforts. This has been criticized on some newsgroups > as being exaggerated. But here is the report from Computer > Reseller News in Techwire (see > http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/aug/0817corel.html > for the full text): > > OTTAWA -- Corel has rethought its Java strategy, > according to sources briefed by the company. > > Now, the plan is to put the bulk of application > logic on servers, which would then > serve up what's needed to the client, whether that client > is a PC or a Network Computer, said Amy Wohl, president > of Wohl Associates, a Narberth, Pa., researcher. > > Previously, the company was rewriting its bread-and-butter > drawing and productivity applications in Java. But that > effort has been delayed significantly. > > Corel now plans to use home-grown technology, code-named > Remagen [...] > > There still will be a lower-end Java suite for NCs due in > October, Wohl noted, but the thrust has shifted considerably > to the enterprise. > > The word "altogether" in "Dropping its Java strategy altogether" > was based on the initial press reports and may turn out to be too > strong. The jury is still out as to how "altogether" the drop is, > although in the software business "delayed significantly" is often a > euphemism for something more fatal. The point of my note (not a flame, > just a reporting of fact) stands: that the great showcase of Java > triumph, reported everywhere including in these newsgroups, was > perhaps advertized a bit prematurely. > > See also: http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_799.html. The "Toronto Globe and Mail" doesn't sound like a technical publication to me, but rather a generic newspaper. Correct? As a pilot, I know how accurately most newspapers report airplane accidents. If this level of accuracy also applies to technology strategy reports (and I'll wager it does given the technical awareness of most newspaper reporters), then I don't think I'd quote this source in a technically oriented newsgroup. Matt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Flavius.Vespasianus @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3404E9D8.6E3D@epix.net>, whiting@epix.net wrote: >Bertrand Meyer wrote: >> >> The Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that Corel was "ditching" >> Java efforts. This has been criticized on some newsgroups >> as being exaggerated. But here is the report from Computer >> Reseller News in Techwire (see >> http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/aug/0817corel.html >> for the full text): >> >> OTTAWA -- Corel has rethought its Java strategy, >> according to sources briefed by the company. >> >> Now, the plan is to put the bulk of application >> logic on servers, which would then >> serve up what's needed to the client, whether that client >> is a PC or a Network Computer, said Amy Wohl, president >> of Wohl Associates, a Narberth, Pa., researcher. >> >> Previously, the company was rewriting its bread-and-butter >> drawing and productivity applications in Java. But that >> effort has been delayed significantly. >> >> Corel now plans to use home-grown technology, code-named >> Remagen [...] >> >> There still will be a lower-end Java suite for NCs due in >> October, Wohl noted, but the thrust has shifted considerably >> to the enterprise. >> >> The word "altogether" in "Dropping its Java strategy altogether" >> was based on the initial press reports and may turn out to be too >> strong. The jury is still out as to how "altogether" the drop is, >> although in the software business "delayed significantly" is often a >> euphemism for something more fatal. The point of my note (not a flame, >> just a reporting of fact) stands: that the great showcase of Java >> triumph, reported everywhere including in these newsgroups, was >> perhaps advertized a bit prematurely. >> >> See also: http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_799.html. > >The "Toronto Globe and Mail" doesn't sound like a technical publication >to me, but rather a generic newspaper. Correct? > >As a pilot, I know how accurately most newspapers report airplane >accidents. If this level of accuracy also applies to technology >strategy reports (and I'll wager it does given the technical awareness >of most newspaper reporters), then I don't think I'd quote this source >in a technically oriented newsgroup. As a computer professional (and a pilot as well), I know how accurately most trade rags report on the computer industry. The accuracy is no better than in the regular newspapers. ------------------------------------------------ Doesn't the marketing person who decided "Windows 4.0" should be called "Windows '95" look really stupid right now? Home Page: http://home.att.net/~miano Home of the Delphi Component Writers' FAQ EMail Address: |m.i.a.n.o @ | |w.o.r.l.d.n.e.t . | |a.t.t .| |n.e.t | Full Name: ------------------- -J.o.h.n?M.i.a.n.o- ------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Mike Coffin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Mike Coffin @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2911 bytes --] Bertrand Meyer <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> writes: > James P. White wrote: > > [Quoting me] > > > It's really fascinating to read this again a month later, > > > with the recent announcements -- widely reported by the > > > press -- that Corel is dropping its Java strategy altogether. > > > > > > So much for the showcase success of the century... > > [James P. White] > > > As I am sure you will hear, those reports were entirely inaccurate. > > The Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that Corel was "ditching" > Java efforts. This has been criticized on some newsgroups > as being exaggerated. But here is the report from Computer > Reseller News in Techwire... Rather than rely on sources that are notoriously unreliable when it comes to technical information, how about just going to the source? E.g., http://www.corel.com/javastrat/index.htm. Here is the front matter: "This document outlines Corel's Business Applications strategy and the role that Java plays. The future focus of Corel's Business Applications targets three primary areas. "The first area of concentration for Corel is to add Java technology (code named Remagen) to its existing suite that will allow Corel� WordPerfect� Suite 8, or other software such as Microsoft� Office, to be run on a server and accessed via a thin Java client on any Java virtual machine. Targeted to the corporate community, this product will allow for lower maintenance costs and cross-platform access to the Corel family of products and any other Windows NT�-based application. "The second step is to produce a new line of products that are Internet-centric and take advantage of Corel's Java expertise. This new product line will combine concepts found in our present CorelCENTRAL product that ships in Corel� WordPerfect� Suite 8, evolving technology from our Corel� Office for Java, and other technology and concepts that are presently being worked on at Corel. This development will create a new generation of products for information management and knowledge handling inside and outside the organization. "The third area of concentration for Corel is to continue producing and evolving its present suite of Windows� products. Corel's customers can expect to see future versions of Corel WordPerfect Suite as the company moves these business applications forward." None of this sounds much like Corel is "ditching" Java. I think that, as usual, the press is engaging in pack journalism. Someone early on interpreted what Corel did as a retreat from Java, so journalists from all over raced off to write that story. The fact that it wasn't actually true doesn't matter much: it's a *big* story, and lot's of people *want* it to be true. So we get a sort of Gresham's law of journalism where bad journalism drives out good. -mike ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Mike Coffin @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Mike Coffin says <<Rather than rely on sources that are notoriously unreliable when it comes to technical information, how about just going to the source?>> Several people on this newsgroup have (very reasonably) cautioned that newspapers may not be the best source of information. I would like to suggest that neither is the PR department of the company affected, which is of course working to put the best possible spin on this situation! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-30 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-30 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Robert Dewar wrote: > > Mike Coffin says > > <<Rather than rely on sources that are notoriously unreliable when it > comes to technical information, how about just going to the source?>> > > Several people on this newsgroup have (very reasonably) cautioned that > newspapers may not be the best source of information. I would like to > suggest that neither is the PR department of the company affected, which > is of course working to put the best possible spin on this situation! That may be true is some general sense, but of course is not relevant to the topic of this thread which is not the credibility of the source of public information but rather the totally inaccurate report that Corel had made a major shift or retreat in their Java strategy when in fact what the company had said was that they were expanding their Java efforts. jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` James P. White @ 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-31 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.872856497@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > Mike Coffin says > > <<Rather than rely on sources that are notoriously unreliable when it > comes to technical information, how about just going to the source?>> > > Several people on this newsgroup have (very reasonably) cautioned that > newspapers may not be the best source of information. I would like to > suggest that neither is the PR department of the company affected, which > is of course working to put the best possible spin on this situation! Wise words - that apply at least as much to the _source_ of this particular rumor's occurance here. /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Mike Coffin @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy 3 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3162 bytes --] Bertrand Meyer wrote: > ... > http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/aug/0817corel.html > for the full text): > > ... > Corel now plans to use home-grown technology, code-named > Remagen [...] >... There's another thing which illustrates how the reporters totally missed the point, Remagen is implemented in Java! It is Corel's network centric (or as they say with the current marketing buzz - "enterprise") application server technology. For those who actually care about what Corel is doing, you can go to their home page <http://www.corel.com>. They have a link on their front page pointing you directly to documentation of their current efforts and product roll out plans for their Java technology. One of the pages there (updated to dispel the misinformation from that article) is <http://www.corel.com/javastrat/commitment.htm>, which begins: > Corel's Commitment to Java�Stronger Than Ever > 100% Pure Java on the Desktop > > With the development of the prototype Corel Office for Java product, > Corel has pioneered the use > of Java in the implementation of mission-critical business applications. > Network-centric computing > has rapidly emerged as the dominant new direction for the enterprise. > Corel's new Java-based > solution creates a bridge to existing Windows applications and legacy > files, and also empowers > the emerging Network Computing (NC) paradigm. >... So while I understand your glee at the prospect that your prediction about Java's eminent failure had already received the confirmation of a major casualty, you will have to accept that Corel is anything but. In fact the whole point of their announcement was that their early efforts confirmed their strategy and that they are now expanding it into the next stage of both technology development and deployment. So Corel continues as the Great Java Showcase and I predict that they will consequently have considerable success in the marketplace for corporate office software, an area in which they (the WordPerfect product they bought from Novell) were about to fall into oblivion. When Corel's success with their office software in Java is examined several years from now, it will be understood simply as the normal process of competitive pressure leading an innovative company into creating a new technology to out compete the dinosaurs who are stuck with the old paradigm (unfortunately for Corel, Microsoft has also demonstrated that Bill understands the future of Java too by having dropped their previous strategy for network dominence - Blackbird - in favor of Java only weeks after JDK 1.0 was released). Also, the next time you start another one of these cross posted monsters, please use comp.lang.java.advocacy instead of comp.lang.java.tech. jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Charles Ditzel 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Dennis Weldy @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Of course, newspper reports never misquote, or misunderstand what was stated. Evidently, Corel has a rebutal on its web page. What about that? Dennis Bertrand Meyer wrote in article <34048653.63DECDAD@eiffel.com>... >James P. White wrote: > >[Quoting me] >> > It's really fascinating to read this again a month later, >> > with the recent announcements -- widely reported by the >> > press -- that Corel is dropping its Java strategy altogether. >> > >> > So much for the showcase success of the century... > >[James P. White] > >> As I am sure you will hear, those reports were entirely inaccurate. > >The Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that Corel was "ditching" >Java efforts. This has been criticized on some newsgroups >as being exaggerated. But here is the report from Computer >Reseller News in Techwire (see >http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/aug/0817corel.html >for the full text): > > OTTAWA -- Corel has rethought its Java strategy, > according to sources briefed by the company. > > Now, the plan is to put the bulk of application > logic on servers, which would then > serve up what's needed to the client, whether that client > is a PC or a Network Computer, said Amy Wohl, president > of Wohl Associates, a Narberth, Pa., researcher. > > Previously, the company was rewriting its bread-and-butter > drawing and productivity applications in Java. But that > effort has been delayed significantly. > > Corel now plans to use home-grown technology, code-named > Remagen [...] > > There still will be a lower-end Java suite for NCs due in > October, Wohl noted, but the thrust has shifted considerably > to the enterprise. > >The word "altogether" in "Dropping its Java strategy altogether" >was based on the initial press reports and may turn out to be too >strong. The jury is still out as to how "altogether" the drop is, >although in the software business "delayed significantly" is often a >euphemism for something more fatal. The point of my note (not a flame, >just a reporting of fact) stands: that the great showcase of Java >triumph, reported everywhere including in these newsgroups, was >perhaps advertized a bit prematurely. > >See also: http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_799.html. > >-- >Bertrand Meyer, President, ISE Inc. >ISE Building, 2nd floor, 270 Storke Road, Goleta CA 93117 >805-685-1006, fax 805-685-6869, <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> >http://www.eiffel.com, with instructions for download >. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy @ 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Charles Ditzel 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Charles Ditzel @ 1997-09-03 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dennis Weldy Unfortunately the erroneous articles have caused confusion...and it nothing as "fatal" as Mr Meyer imagines. Try http://www.corel.com/javastrat/index.html. This explains with a bit more clarity what is going on. Corel, when all is said and done, is INVESTING MORE HEAVILY IN JAVA. Two projects "Remagan" and "Alta" with time to markets of Winter '97 and Spring '98 (according to their charts). Overall - as ambitious (in many ways) as the Office Suite for Java - simply they have rethought and adapted to the emerging Java competition (i.e. Lotus, Applix, etc.) and the new web-based groupware market. Dennis Weldy wrote: > > Of course, newspper reports never misquote, or misunderstand what was > stated. > Evidently, Corel has a rebutal on its web page. What about that? [more stuff deleted] [Stuff from Mr. Meyer] > >The word "altogether" in "Dropping its Java strategy altogether" > >was based on the initial press reports and may turn out to be too > >strong. The jury is still out as to how "altogether" the drop is, > >although in the software business "delayed significantly" is often a > >euphemism for something more fatal. The point of my note (not a flame, > >just a reporting of fact) stands: that the great showcase of Java > >triumph, reported everywhere including in these newsgroups, was > >perhaps advertized a bit prematurely. [stuff deleted] > >Bertrand Meyer, President, ISE Inc. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White ` (3 more replies) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 2 siblings, 4 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > percent. If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White [not found] ` <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-30 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bert Bril 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Mike Charlton ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Robert Dewar wrote: > > James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article > <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > > percent. > > If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by > a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to > waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be > persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is > VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. Yes, there is something VERY wrong with the way most programmers (not me of course) write programs. When combining modules from multiple sources it inevitably turns out that multiple, not very compatible, memory management schemes are used (sometimes, but not often, more than one scheme in the same module). It is also inevitable (lacking the resources of NASA) that the modules have had insufficient inspection and stress testing and are rife with memory management bugs and memory munging that are not caught. The integration phase (which is where the vast majority of the savings comes) when using C and C++ with commercial and developmental libraries and modules has been a black hole for resources in large systems which has swallowed many (extremely well funded) projects whole. Being able to proceed through integration needing little more than functional testing is a huge boon to large system development and is reason enough (although there are others) to use Java for commercial applications. Your derisive comment does make me wonder how many systems of 500K lines or more you have designed and built (I am on my fourth one and have had many happy clients). jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu>]
* Re: Memory management techniques -- was Re: The great Java showcase [not found] ` <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu> @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu> doylep@ecf.toronto.edu (Patrick Doyle) writes: > [Eiffel and Java newsgroups removed because they use GC] Java has GC since the JVM provides it. So, any Ada->JVM impl will have it, e.g., Aonix ObjectAda or Intermetrics AdaMagic. So, anywhere Java GC is, you have Ada GC... /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White [not found] ` <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu> @ 1997-08-30 0:00 ` Bert Bril 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jay Martin 1 sibling, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Bert Bril @ 1997-08-30 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) James P. White wrote: > > Robert Dewar wrote: > > > > James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article > > <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > > > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > > > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > > > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > > > percent. > > > > If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by > > a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to > > waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be > > persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is > > VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. > > Yes, there is something VERY wrong with the way most programmers (not me > of course) write programs. So, do the programmers decide not to use GC? That _is_ a major problem. Because it's a design issue. And if the boost of GC is so large somewhere, then they should get GC immediately there. For any serious language there is GC available nowadays. And, e.g., in C++ you can now even choose which parts you want to handle manually, and which part not (see e.g. http://www.geodesic.com ). It's always the same story. People find themselves in a badly managed environment with bad QA, bad Design, bad everything. And then, of course, the language is to blame. Java may be the best choice for a lot of situations. But the evaluation of whether it is the best should be kept separated from these managerial problems. If you have no QA: make sure you get that first. You'll not make good software using Java then, either. Bert -- de Groot - Bril Earth Sciences B.V. -- Boulevard 1945 - 24, 7511 AE Enschede, The Netherlands -- mailto:bert@dgb.nl , http://www.dgb.nl -- Tel: +31 534315155 , Fax: +31 534315104 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-30 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bert Bril @ 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jay Martin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jay Martin @ 1997-08-31 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bert Bril wrote: > It's always the same story. People find themselves in a badly managed > environment with bad QA, bad Design, bad everything. And then, of > course, the language is to blame. Java may be the best choice for a lot > of situations. But the evaluation of whether it is the best should be > kept separated from these managerial problems. If you have no QA: make > sure you get that first. You'll not make good software using Java then, > either. I don't agree. Which tools are best is dependent on the environment. Bozo environments need special restricted tools that cater to their bozo natures. Its best not to give loaded guns to 3 year olds. Of course it is best not have have "bozo environments" but the incompetent programmers and managers in this (sewer) industry make that a pipe dream. Jay ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Mike Charlton [not found] ` <N.19970829.uput@sisyphus.demon.co.uk> [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Mike Charlton @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article > <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > > percent. > > If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by > a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to > waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be > persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is > VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. A couple of people have said that Robert's statement is a cheap shot. I'd have to disagree. I think the difference of opinion comes about from different ways of measuring productivity. Automatic memory management will surely not affect the requirements stage. It should only slightly affect the design stage (the design will be different, but you really don't have to spend all that much time worrying about memory issues). In coding, it will have some effect on productivity, but if you have some experienced programmers, it shouldn't be more than 20-30% of the time (IMHO). Back end testing shouldn't uncover too many issues (especially if you have already used a memory checking program like Purify). So again, 20-30% of your time should be plenty. Support and maintenance is another question. Tracking down memory problems is a real pain. In my experience, 10 or 15% of issues are memory related. They also take an inordinate amount of time to deal with. Making sure you have good code reviews should keep this to a minimum, though. Anyway, I agree with Robert. If you are spending 80% (or even 50%) of your time *for the whole project* on memory issues, you have some serious problems (lack of code inspections and inexperienced people qualify as serious problems with me). I have worked with both large C++ projects and large projects using a proprietary language with automatic memory management. Yes, with C++ we spent a lot of time thinking about memory. However, using automatic memory management, we spent a lot of time thinking about performance. I'd say it's a bit of a toss up. No one solution will work well for every problem. Mike ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <N.19970829.uput@sisyphus.demon.co.uk>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <N.19970829.uput@sisyphus.demon.co.uk> @ 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Mike Charlton 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Dave Sparks 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Mike Charlton @ 1997-09-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Dave Sparks <Dave.Sparks@sisyphus.demon.co.uk> writes: > >>>>> "MC" == Mike Charlton <mikechar@nortel.ca> writes: > > MC> ... > > MC> I have worked with both large C++ projects and large projects using a > MC> proprietary language with automatic memory management. Yes, with C++ > MC> we spent a lot of time thinking about memory. However, using > MC> automatic memory management, we spent a lot of time thinking about > MC> performance. I'd say it's a bit of a toss up. No one solution will > MC> work well for every problem. > > Are you saying that when you used C++ you spent so much time on > memory management that you couldn't afford to think about performance? I'm not sure if that was meant to be a rhetorical question, but in case it wasn't -- the answer is "No". We just didn't need to spend very much time tweaking performance. My point was that automatic garbage collection makes life easier for you. But it doesn't come for free. You *can* overcome performance difficulties, but I figure it takes about as much effort as memory stuff using C++ (IMHO, anyway -- YMMV). Mike P.S. Please note that the requirements for different projects vary considerably. What may constitue a performance difficulty in one project may have no impact on another. I'll use Java, Smalltalk, Eiffel (or whatever) on projects for which thet make sense. I'll also use C++ on projects for which it makes sense (and it *does* occasionally :-)). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Mike Charlton @ 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Dave Sparks 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Dave Sparks @ 1997-09-03 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> "MC" == Mike Charlton <mikechar@nortel.ca> writes: MC> Dave Sparks <Dave.Sparks@sisyphus.demon.co.uk> writes: >> >>>>> "MC" == Mike Charlton <mikechar@nortel.ca> writes: >> MC> ... >> MC> I have worked with both large C++ projects and large projects using a MC> proprietary language with automatic memory management. Yes, with C++ MC> we spent a lot of time thinking about memory. However, using MC> automatic memory management, we spent a lot of time thinking about MC> performance. I'd say it's a bit of a toss up. No one solution will MC> work well for every problem. >> Are you saying that when you used C++ you spent so much time on >> memory management that you couldn't afford to think about performance? MC> I'm not sure if that was meant to be a rhetorical question, but in MC> case it wasn't -- the answer is "No". We just didn't need to spend MC> very much time tweaking performance. My point was that automatic MC> garbage collection makes life easier for you. But it doesn't come MC> for free. You *can* overcome performance difficulties, but I figure MC> it takes about as much effort as memory stuff using C++ (IMHO, anyway MC> -- YMMV). The question _was_ rhetorical - the point being that when you have one _huge_ problem, the other, smaller, problems disappear into the background and can get forgotten. We've been using a byte-coded interpreted language with mark-sweep garbage collection for over ten years, and the GC costs are typically about 1% of the total. Individual GCs take less than 0.1 seconds with a 2Mb heap on a SUN SparcStation 5, which is not a problem in our context. We used to have performance problems, but we solved them by re-engineering the application (delivering the 10::1 improvement we'd had to promise to get the funding). It's doubtful that this product would have been written in C or C++, but if it had been I don't think it would ever have met our current performance expectations. We also have C and C++ code where memory management is a very difficult problem, partly because some of the code involved is not under our control. This area also needs re-engineering, because the risk of memory leaks is unacceptably high. This re-engineering will not be easy. Java performance does seem to be poor at the moment, but I expect it to improve. Remember that at one time performance was cited as the reason for routinely using assembly code rather than a high-level language. This claim is uncommon today, and I expect to see a similar change in attitude over the choice of fully-compiled or compiled-and-interpreted languages. I do know of one case, from twenty years ago, where two versions of a COBOL compiler were written simultaneously by two separate teams. One version was written in assembly code, while the other used a purpose-designed compiled-and-interpreted language, which was developed as part of the project (and never used for any other purpose). Each team beleived that its method was the better one, and was determined to prove it. When the initial versions of the copilers were compared, the assembly-code version was faster. A month later, the compile-and=interpret team, using the instrumentation that the interpreter made possible, had improved their compiler's performance enough to beat the assembly-coded version (where performance improvements could not be accurately targeted). (The requirement was to replace an earlier COBOL compiler badly written by assembly-code programmers unwillingly using a high-level fully-compiled language.) -- Dave Sparks, Staffordshire, England ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Peter Hermann 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Peter Hermann @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Patrick Doyle (doylep@ecf.toronto.edu) wrote: > For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is > spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. great! keep on spending :-) > If this isn't the case with you then, well, I suppose you're > just the greatest darn programmer in the whole world. Not at all, he simply uses Ada ;-) -- Peter Hermann Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Peter Hermann @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Arthur Nelson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby 3 siblings, 2 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Patrick said << That's a pretty cheap shot, Robert. Plus, it's not necessarily true. There are applications that just beg for automatic memory management, and if they happend upon one of these, they certainly could have seen such an improvement. For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. If this isn't the case with you then, well, I suppose you're just the greatest darn programmer in the whole world.>> Well different people have different styles in programming. I personally like programming, but hate debugging, so I perfer to spend my effort getting this right to start with. But I realize others prefer to spend their time debugging -- it's a matter of taste partly -- although I suspect that a lot of people do spend far too much time with a debugger. It's interesting to ask a roomful of C and C++ programmers how mnay of them routinely use a dynamic debugger. You will get pretty much a 100% response, plus a reaction that the question is curious. If you ask the same question in a roomful of Ada programmers, you will find a split, somewhere close to 50/50. That's partly a language difference, but also partly a style difference. Particularly in C++, proper abstraction and encapsulation should make it possible to minimize problems with dynamic allocation. Now I must admit that most C and to somewhat lesser an extent C++ programmers seem blissfully unaware of what abstraction is all about. As for applications where you can get a factor of several productivtiy improvement by using garbage collection, I think that is rubbish. Remember I speak here as someone who fully knows the vale of garbage collection. I wrote the SPITBOL systems (see the paper in SP&E, 1977, which describes the interesting approach SPITBOL uses to GC), and was deeply involved in the Algol-68 design. So I know the advantage, and it is consderable, but the idea that GC alone could cut down the time to design/document/code/test/integrate/productize a product by a factor of several seems ludicrous to me. Perhaps you are just talking about coding time -- even there the estimate is way high. You do NOT have to be the "greatest darn programmer in the whole world" to avoid wasting 40-50% of your time looking for memory allocation bugs in C++, you just need to create the proper abstractoins in the first place. Now to be fair, you may well be spending this time on other people's poorly written code, in which case the blame lies elsewhere. But if you think my comment is a cheap shot, then you are far from being sufficiently aware of what can be achieved by proper software process, and this does NOT require super duper clever programmers, it is something that can be achieved by good management, and good choice of techniques, languages, and tools, with typical competent programmers, not super stars. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-30 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1 sibling, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-30 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.872872168@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote: >Patrick said > ><<For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is >spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. > > If this isn't the case with you then, well, I suppose you're >just the greatest darn programmer in the whole world.>> > > >Well different people have different styles in programming. I personally >like programming, but hate debugging, so I perfer to spend my effort >getting this right to start with. But I realize others prefer to spend >their time debugging -- it's a matter of taste partly -- although I >suspect that a lot of people do spend far too much time with a debugger. Hey, I don't like debugging either... >You do NOT have to be the "greatest darn programmer in the whole world" to >avoid wasting 40-50% of your time looking for memory allocation bugs in >C++, you just need to create the proper abstractoins in the first place. I'd love to know how. Do you have any references to techniques for this sort of thing? >Now to be fair, you may well be spending this time on other people's >poorly written code, in which case the blame lies elsewhere. Actually, in my case, that's true. In fact, for the bulk of my professional career, I've been upgrading legacy code, and I don't really know much else, so maybe I'm overestimating my problems with memory. >But if you think my comment is a cheap shot, then you are far from being >sufficiently aware of what can be achieved by proper software process, >and this does NOT require super duper clever programmers, it is something >that can be achieved by good management, and good choice of techniques, >languages, and tools, with typical competent programmers, not super stars. Sure, but I still think it was a cheap shot. Someone said "I spend X amount of time finding memory bugs" and you said "then you must be doing something terribly wrong". Now that you've explained your reasoning, I think we're all better off. -PD -- -- Patrick Doyle doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1 sibling, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-31 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.872872168@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > As for applications where you can get a factor of several productivtiy > improvement by using garbage collection, I think that is rubbish. Remember I find myself in complete agreement with you here - despite the likelyhood that I am often seen as a GC fanatic. > So I know the advantage, and it is consderable, but the idea that GC alone > could cut down the time to design/document/code/test/integrate/productize > a product by a factor of several seems ludicrous to me. Again (though I find it hard to choke out, :-), I find that I must agree. Even a factor of 2 is rather hard to believe, let alone "several factors". Let's face, getting even a 10% advantage is a rare thing. OTOH, even a 10% advantage must then be characterized as a "big deal". Personally, I think GC varies anywhere from 0% to maybe 15-20% depending on the application characteristics. > Perhaps you are just talking about coding time -- even there the estimate > is way high. Agreed. The coding advantage is really the biggest win as you don't have to put the same level of effort up front in ensuring things will behave correctly wrt dynamic memory issues. > You do NOT have to be the "greatest darn programmer in the whole > world" to avoid wasting 40-50% of your time looking for memory > allocation bugs in C++, you just need to create the proper > abstractoins in the first place. OK, I'm still choking, but again, I must agree... /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-09-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) JOn said <<Again (though I find it hard to choke out, :-), I find that I must agree. Even a factor of 2 is rather hard to believe, let alone "several factors". Let's face, getting even a 10% advantage is a rare thing. OTOH, even a 10% advantage must then be characterized as a "big deal". Personally, I think GC varies anywhere from 0% to maybe 15-20% depending on the application characteristics. >> Absolutely, gains of 10 or 20% are very significant and very important to pursue. The trouble is that if people really start to believe the "several hundred percent" or "order of magnitude improvement" claims, they may overlook the achievable smaller bug significant gains. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-05 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-09-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.873149189@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > JOn said > > "several factors". Let's face, getting even a 10% advantage is a rare > thing. OTOH, even a 10% advantage must then be characterized as a > "big deal". Personally, I think GC varies anywhere from 0% to maybe > 15-20% depending on the application characteristics. > >> > > Absolutely, gains of 10 or 20% are very significant and very important > to pursue. The trouble is that if people really start to believe the > "several hundred percent" or "order of magnitude improvement" claims, > they may overlook the achievable smaller bug significant gains. Absolutely agreed. The importance of this is really hard to over-emphasize as you can lose site of very real and tangible gains. Gains that are quite readily seen but are dismissed as not being "good enough", simply because they aren't that "magic bullet" level increase. But the latter is largely a fiction and so you simply mire yourself into non-progressing technology. A 10% here a 20% there etc. really begins to add up over the long term and eventually we might actually get this "several factors" over the course of building on these very real "small gains". That's why the overly prevalent "all or nothing" attitude in this business is so destructive and self defeating. /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-09-05 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-09-06 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-09-05 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Jon said <<Absolutely agreed. The importance of this is really hard to over-emphasize as you can lose site of very real and tangible gains. Gains that are quite readily seen but are dismissed as not being "good enough", simply because they aren't that "magic bullet" level increase. But the latter is largely a fiction and so you simply mire yourself into non-progressing technology. A 10% here a 20% there etc. really begins to add up over the long term and eventually we might actually get this "several factors" over the course of building on these very real "small gains". That's why the overly prevalent "all or nothing" attitude in this business is so destructive and self defeating.>> You don't even need to let them "add up", a single 10% gain is highly valuable. Anyone who does not think so is welcome to send me a check for 10% of the cost of their next software project on the grounds that they will not notice the difference (but I will :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-09-05 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-09-06 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-09-06 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <dewar.873477226@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > Jon said > <<< > yourself into non-progressing technology. A 10% here a 20% there > etc. really begins to add up over the long term and eventually we > might actually get this "several factors" over the course of building > on these very real "small gains". That's why the overly prevalent>>> > > You don't even need to let them "add up", a single 10% gain is highly > valuable. Right. What I meant above was "adding up" across a sequence of technologies giving such increments, not adding up on a project. > Anyone who does not think so is welcome to send me a check > for 10% of the cost of their next software project on the grounds that > they will not notice the difference (but I will :-) Exactly. Hey, I'll take 10% of your 10% and will be a very happy camper! /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Peter Hermann 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Arthur Nelson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Arthur Nelson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Patrick Doyle wrote: > > In article <dewar.872791474@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote: > >James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article > ><3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > >> Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > >> experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > >> pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > >> percent. > > > >If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by > >a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to > >waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be > >persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is > >VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. > > That's a pretty cheap shot, Robert. Plus, it's not necessarily > true. There are applications that just beg for automatic memory > management, and if they happend upon one of these, they certainly > could have seen such an improvement. > > For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is > spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. > > If this isn't the case with you then, well, I suppose you're > just the greatest darn programmer in the whole world. > > -PD > -- > -- > Patrick Doyle > doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca 40 to 50% is astounding. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Arthur Nelson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3406C0B0.546F@vineyard.net>, Arthur Nelson <art@vineyard.net> wrote: >Patrick Doyle wrote: >> >> For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is >> spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. > >40 to 50% is astounding. PLEASE share your techniques. I could really use some help in this area, it seems. -PD PS. Perhaps I should mention that I'm maintaining and upgrading legacy code. That's one main reason I spend so much time on memory issues--the original programmer wasn't too concerned with them. -- -- Patrick Doyle doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle @ 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-09-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Patrick said <<PS. Perhaps I should mention that I'm maintaining and upgrading legacy code. That's one main reason I spend so much time on memory issues--the original programmer wasn't too concerned with them.>> OK, but then that says nothing about the inherent importance of this particular issue. If you were working on code where an incompetent original programmer had written all their floating-point formulae thinking that real arithmetic was possible on machines, you might be spending 40-50% of your time on that, but it does not prove that as a generalization, this is an important general issue! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Arthur Nelson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby [not found] ` <EFonoz.AFC@ecf.toronto.edu> 3 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Laurent Guerby @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) doylep@ecf.toronto.edu (Patrick Doyle) writes: > > [...] > That's a pretty cheap shot, Robert. Plus, it's not necessarily > true. There are applications that just beg for automatic memory > management, and if they happend upon one of these, they certainly > could have seen such an improvement. > > For my part, I'd guess that at least 40 to 50% of my time is > spent looking for memory allocation bugs in C++. > [...] Ada has the ability to manipulate unconstrained objects (something like returning dynamic sized objects/arrays) without requiring user heap management. The greatly obviates the need for user allocation/deallocation, you can write very large Ada programs without doing fine grained heap management (and I agree with you, very error prone unless you're some kind of programming deity ;-). When doing graph/tree stuff, you'll often see a big dynamically allocated array behind the scene in Ada programs, reallocated when there's not enough room, a good example of this is GNAT (see the generic unit table in the sources). It is an area where language matters, by allowing stack (the Ada compiler may use dymaic allocation behind your back, but I guess most modern Ada technologies use a secondary stack) allocated complex dynamic types (Ada case) or by providing garbage collection (Java). I've seen high level translation to Ada of C++ API, which originately required the user to worry a lot about heap management (conventions C1, C2, ... C6, that kind of stuff), giving an Ada version without any heap management (discrimated types and unconstrained arrays doing the job). Needless to say, bye bye the "40% to 50% of the time" chasing heap problems ;-). -- Laurent Guerby <guerby@gnat.com>, Team Ada. "Use the Source, Luke. The Source will be with you, always (GPL)." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <EFonoz.AFC@ecf.toronto.edu>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <EFonoz.AFC@ecf.toronto.edu> @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Samuel Mize 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Samuel Mize @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Patrick Doyle wrote: > > In article <fxrabd1l2c.fsf@boole.enst-bretagne.fr>, > Laurent Guerby <Laurent.Guerby@enst-bretagne.fr> wrote: > >doylep@ecf.toronto.edu (Patrick Doyle) writes: > > > > Ada has the ability to manipulate unconstrained objects (something > >like returning dynamic sized objects/arrays) without requiring user > >heap management. The greatly obviates the need for user > >allocation/deallocation, you can write very large Ada programs without > >doing fine grained heap management (and I agree with you, very error > >prone unless you're some kind of programming deity ;-). > > I'm not sure I follow the Ada approach. How do these "unconstrained > objects" work? Here's a very brief discussion (since this thread is so cross- posted). For more info, see the tutorials at www.adahome.com. An Ada object must be constrained (have a definite size) when it exists. However, you can define a type that is not constrained. Each object of that type gets its constraints when created. If a procedure parameter is unconstrained, it gets its constraints from the value given when the procedure is called. Here's a concrete example: declare -- Define an integer-indexed array of characters. We do NOT -- define the min or max indexes, or the size of the array. type Flex_Array is array (integer range <>) of character; A, B: Natural; -- integers greater than or equal to zero procedure X (F: in Flex_Array); begin -- get values for A and B somehow ... declare Flex_A: Flex_Array (1..A); Flex_B: Flex_Array (3..B); begin X (Flex_A); X (Flex_B); end; end; Where Flex_A and Flex_B exist, they have well-defined sizes. However, these sizes are defined at run time. In the first call to X, F'First (the first array index) will be 1. In the second call to X, F'First will be 3. If B is less than 3, Flex_B is a null array, which is perfectly fine in Ada. Sam Mize ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar ` (2 preceding siblings ...) [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 3 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Lee Webber @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On 28 Aug 1997 14:05:41 -0400, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article ><3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... >> Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our >> experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and >> pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred >> percent. > >If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by >a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to >waste that much time previously. And here you ignored "and pointer protection". There is more to pointer problems than the premature release of objects. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 2 siblings, 1 reply; 58+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) neil says <<Eiffel has had that for years, so your productivity boost is only over the C languages. For the other several hundred percent you need to apply DBC, even if only methodologically.>> Any time that people claim giant factors in productivity improvements, they do the technology for which they make the claim a disservice. The trouble is that when anyone reads a silly claim like the above, they tend to assosicate it with everyone who has been supporting the feature. Certainly Betrand Meyer is not going to claim a "several hundred percent improvement" in productivity from using DBC. Just that it can provide in some circumstances a significant productivity boost. Ada has been hurt in the past by ludicrous claims, and it is a common phenomenon. Of course when a methodology, or language, or technique, or whatever, has the effect of resulting in working code instead of catastrophic non-working code, then in some sense the improvement in productivity is infinite, but this is not a useful quantitative way to look at things. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Lee Webber @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On 28 Aug 1997 14:03:51 -0400, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >neil says > ><<Eiffel has had that for years, so your productivity boost is only over the >C languages. For the other several hundred percent you need to apply DBC, >even if only methodologically.>> > >Any time that people claim giant factors in productivity improvements, they >do the technology for which they make the claim a disservice. [etc] Here's the article to which neil was responding: >James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article ><3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... >> Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our >> experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and >> pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred >> percent. Seeing the two together, it's obvious that neil was not making a precise technical claim. Leaving out what you did was a distortion of his message. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 2 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Neil Wilson wrote: > > James P. White <jim@pagesmiths.com> wrote in article > <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > > percent. > > Eiffel has had that for years, so your productivity boost is only over the > C languages. For the other several hundred percent you need to apply DBC, > even if only methodologically. Yes, you are quite right, I did not explain that I was comparing the experience with C and C++ using large commercial libraries for GUI, database, and communications. LISP has had those features too for nearly 40 years now and Smalltalk for 14 years. So obviously there is more to Java and its success than just those features. I personally have been using DBC and OO methodolgy for 16 years, so I already have those several hundred percent (which does have a good deal to do with my success in developing large and reliable systems). jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <JSA.97Aug26153546@alexandria.organon.com>]
[parent not found: <34034658.7DE14518@eiffel.com>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <34034658.7DE14518@eiffel.com> @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 58+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <34034658.7DE14518@eiffel.com> Bertrand Meyer <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> writes: > Jon S Anthony wrote: > > > > In article <34023FC9.59E2B600@eiffel.com> Bertrand Meyer <Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com> writes: > > > > [More inflam[m]atory BM statements...] > > > > That is a really honest and constructive way to cite In this particular case - yes it is. /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 58+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1997-09-16 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 58+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1997-08-25 0:00 The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-26 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus 1997-08-26 0:00 ` BruceMount 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <JSA.97Aug28182029@alexandria.organon.com> [not found] ` <3406C150.3EE5EE0E@stratasys.com> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jay Martin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger [not found] ` <5u0nil$atg@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` not 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe [not found] ` <5u3o1n$hu5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Nick Leaton 1997-09-15 0:00 ` Tim Ottinger 1997-09-16 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 [not found] ` <3402FD4D.C196785B@brightwood.com> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 1997-08-27 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [not found] ` <34047A7D.62319AC4@eiffel.com> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Bertrand Meyer 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Matthew S. Whiting 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Flavius.Vespasianus 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Mike Coffin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Charles Ditzel [not found] ` <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White [not found] ` <EFnKuI.4rI@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Memory management techniques -- was Re: The great Java showcase Jon S Anthony 1997-08-30 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Bert Bril 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jay Martin 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Mike Charlton [not found] ` <N.19970829.uput@sisyphus.demon.co.uk> 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Mike Charlton 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Dave Sparks [not found] ` <EFn8CI.D9p@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Peter Hermann 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-30 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-09-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-09-05 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-09-06 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Arthur Nelson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby [not found] ` <EFonoz.AFC@ecf.toronto.edu> 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Samuel Mize 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Lee Webber 1997-08-28 0:00 ` James P. White [not found] ` <JSA.97Aug26153546@alexandria.organon.com> [not found] ` <34034658.7DE14518@eiffel.com> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox