From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,70016ed51014902d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Warning: Flame Bait
Date: 1996/11/29
Message-ID: <dewar.849319316@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 201497598
references: <01bbdcb5$7500ab30$24af1486@pc-phw> <E1nLxo.Ly3@world.std.com>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Bob Duff says

"I'm not a big fan of Java, but I don't see how anyone can say that Ada
is more portable than Java.  The Java language definition nails down all
kinds of things that are "implementation defined" or "unspecified" in
Ada."

Portability is MUCH more than just a question of the language definition, it
is about being able to practically port a wide range of applications from
one machine to another over a wide range of machines. Java does not yet
begin to meet either of these criteria. We have to wait to see whether
it can in the future, but right now, Java is quite limited in its reasonable
application domain in practice, and I don't see too many Java compilers for
the 1750A, let alone the 8051 :-)