Rogers and BitTorrent: another datapoint

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 08:45:33AM -0700, Matthew Godycki wrote:
> I hate to say this, but it sounds like all these problems would have been solved 
> by consulting some documentation.  As an aside, why is it stupid to define a 
> class (template for an object) in an OO language?  If that's the case, then defining
> a procedure in a procedural language is equally stupid.
> 
> As an aside, Java as a language is actually very stable.  All the various revisions
> have to do more with the additional packages evolving, moreso than the language
> itself.  That in itself is a whole other issue, SUN seems inept at keeping the
> language and libraries separate from one another.

Perhaps because I know OO isn't the catch all solution to everything, I
fail to see the point in having a language that can't do anything
without using objects/classes for it.  Originally I mainly hated the
virtual machine concept, but eventually native compilers came about.
Virtual machines are too inefficient and mainly make sense when you
don't know what the archtecture is going to be.  Most programs you know
are going to run on a specific architecture, so you should simply
compile it for that and not some stupid, bloated, inefficient virtual
machine.

You can work with objective C without using objects.  It has a rather
nice object system, but you don't have to use it.  You can work in C++
without using objects.  It has an OK object system byt you don't have to
use it.  You can work with OCAML without using objects, you basically
use just CAML, which is a very nice version of ML and an awsome
procedural language, but again you don't have to use objects.  Perl has
a lousy object system, but you don't have to use it to do useful stuff.
Modula3 has a rather nice object system, but you can do lots of nice
code without using them.

Java has an OK object system (it originally borrowed a lot from c++,
including some things they should have.  Java2 seems to have fixed a lot
of those problems with the new interfaces system).  You can't do
anything in java without objects.

And yes SUN does a lot of stupid stuff.  They can't seem to figure out
versions numbers at all.  I thought after the Solaris mess they had
learned, but no they did the same thing with java.  So version 1.4 is
java2 and 1.5 if java5 or is it 2.0 is java5 while 1.4 was java2?  What?
Seems a lot like Sunos 4 was solaris 1 and Sunos 5.x was solaris 2.x but
then solaris 2.7 was solaris 7 or sunos 5.7.  Someone at SUN is
obviously insane. :)

--
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists