Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > Apple is deprecating Java

Reply
Thread Tools

Apple is deprecating Java

 
 
Arne Vajhøj
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2010
On 18-11-2010 00:09, ClassCastException wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:26:42 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 25-10-2010 00:39, ClassCastException wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:25:20 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24-10-2010 07:58, ClassCastException wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 23 Oct 2010 21:12:58 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23-10-2010 02:49, ClassCastException wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:50:47 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22-10-2010 00:26, ClassCastException wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:23:59 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 21-10-2010 21:40, Steve Sobol wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article<i9q0bo$u2r$(E-Mail Removed)>, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
>>>>>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>>>> MS essentially killed off their own Java implementation as
>>>>>>>>>>>> well, and
>>>>>>>>>>> no one
>>>>>>>>>>>> noticed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That was different. Microsoft Java was a bastardized version of
>>>>>>>>>>> Java based on a 1.1 JVM with some M$-specific extensions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not only extensions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also a few things removed that MS did not want there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The latter has a pretty bad impact on portability.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So do non-standard extensions: developers use them (sometimes
>>>>>>>>> unwittingly) and then their code isn't portable to the whole rest
>>>>>>>>> of the world.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> True.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But that happens all the time both in Java (and other languages).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A standard does not prevent non-portable code. A standard makes it
>>>>>>>> possible to write portable code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can avoid using non standard extensions and other ways of
>>>>>>>> writing non-portable code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can not do anything to protect against somebody not
>>>>>>>> implementing the full standard.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can not do anything to protect against another developer using
>>>>>>> a non standard extension.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever heard of code review?
>>>>>
>>>>> So, maybe your boss can. You still can't.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you think it is called peer review and not boss review?
>>>
>>> You didn't say "peer review", you said "code review".

>>
>> Code reviews are supposed to be peer reviews.

>
> "Supposed to be" being the operative words here.


If not explicit stated otherwise I code review
is expected to be peer review.

That is what is being used.

Arne

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
deprecating T(V) as c-style cast for POD T in favor of initializationsemantics - Off topic kinda Gianni Mariani C++ 1 10-28-2008 02:45 AM
deprecating abstract methods Thomas Hawtin Java 5 04-17-2006 01:54 PM
Apple sues Apple over iPod GraB NZ Computing 2 03-29-2006 08:49 PM
Apple iPod trash, like all Apple products Rich DVD Video 8 02-27-2006 01:32 AM



Advertisments