Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > tools for programming applets

Reply
Thread Tools

tools for programming applets

 
 
Andrew Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-25-2011
On May 24, 1:50*am, horos22 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>..95% of the people running your code are running microsoft browsers and
> microsoft java implementations. ..


The last Microsoft 'Java' implementation I am aware of was the MSVM
that claimed to support 1.1.4. Sun sued them over it. Sun one.

That was all a *long* time ago. Which millennium are you trapped in?

--
Andrew T.
http://pscode.org/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-25-2011
In message <irgamq$1m8$(E-Mail Removed)>, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:

> jQuery ... does a lot of things wrong ...


So put your coding skills where your mouth is, and offer up something
better.

> If you go to comp.lang.javascript you'll get quite negative opinion
> on the usefulness of the jQuery library from the experts.


It still offers functionality in places where Java doesn’t even have places.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alessio Stalla
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On May 25, 2:06*am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Alessio
>
> Stalla wrote:
> > What if in the OP's case the server is backed by a 1TB database?

>
> 1TB drives can be had for pocket change these days.
>
> What was the problem, again?


I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
complexity especially, and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate
a big DB at a snap of your fingers, and certainly I wouldn't do it
*just to test one applet*. Would you duplicate an arbitrarily big web
application to test the new version of a Flash app? Is simplicity not
a value anymore?

--
Alessio
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Alessio
Stalla wrote:

> On May 25, 2:06 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>
>> In message
>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Alessio
>>
>> Stalla wrote:
>> > What if in the OP's case the server is backed by a 1TB database?

>>
>> 1TB drives can be had for pocket change these days.
>>
>> What was the problem, again?

>
> I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
> complexity especially ...


Rsync can replicate an entire file structure, no matter how complex.

> , and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate a big DB at a snap of
> your fingers ...


Considering how many days this thread has seen such pointless arguments back
and forth, you would have finished copying that terabyte database by now.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On 05/26/2011 08:57 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Alessio
> Stalla wrote:
>
>> On May 25, 2:06 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
>> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>>
>>> In message
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> Alessio
>>>
>>> Stalla wrote:
>>>> What if in the OP's case the server is backed by a 1TB database?
>>>
>>> 1TB drives can be had for pocket change these days.
>>>
>>> What was the problem, again?

>>
>> I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
>> complexity especially ...

>
> Rsync can replicate an entire file structure, no matter how complex.
>
>> , and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate a big DB at a snap of
>> your fingers ...

>
> Considering how many days this thread has seen such pointless arguments back
> and forth, you would have finished copying that terabyte database by now.


[APPLAUSE]

Lawrence, your reasoning is sound and your points are correct on this matter.

--
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi.../c/cf/Friz.jpg
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alessio Stalla
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On May 26, 3:04*pm, Lew <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 08:57 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>
>
> > In message
> > <(E-Mail Removed)>, Alessio
> > Stalla wrote:

>
> >> On May 25, 2:06 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
> >> central.gen.new_zealand> *wrote:

>
> >>> In message
> >>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >>> Alessio

>
> >>> Stalla wrote:
> >>>> What if in the OP's case the server is backed by a 1TB database?

>
> >>> 1TB drives can be had for pocket change these days.

>
> >>> What was the problem, again?

>
> >> I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
> >> complexity especially ...

>
> > Rsync can replicate an entire file structure, no matter how complex.

>
> >> , and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate a big DB at a snap of
> >> your fingers ...

>
> > Considering how many days this thread has seen such pointless argumentsback
> > and forth, you would have finished copying that terabyte database by now.

>
> [APPLAUSE]
>
> Lawrence, your reasoning is sound and your points are correct on this matter.


Ok, I give up. Maybe I simply see things differently from the majority
of Java developers. I just cannot imagine to always have to clone a
server in order to test a client. Do you really think that e.g. Google
cloned the entire Youtube to develop their HTML5 player?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
Alessio Stalla wrote:
> Ok, I give up.


Appropriate.

> Maybe I simply see things differently from the majority of Java developers. I just cannot imagine to always have to clone a
> server in order to test a client. Do you really think that e.g. Google
> cloned the entire Youtube [sic] to develop their HTML5 player?


Irrelevant and false analogy. I conclude that you haven't a valid point if
you have to reach like that. You don't get to reframe the point in such a
ludicrous straw-man fashion. Well, you have a right to try, but it doesn't
change the truth that you are trying to resist.

No one suggested that cloning YouTube is necessary to test a browser. We did
suggest, correctly, that the applet security mechanism is designed to prevent
exactly what the OP requested, that there were good reasons for that, that
there were better ways to develop an applet that didn't have a problem with
the security restrictions, and that the overhead of setting up a single
development workstation with the resources to simulate the OP's production box
(a single node, a fact you overlooked in your eagerness to proffer useless
rhetoric) was minimal. All those things are true.

It is also true that Google does test even large-scale applications on a
separate infrastructure from its production servers for exactly the reasons
"the majority of Java developers", who actually know what we're talking about.
There's a reason why so many people agree with the truth, Alessio Stalla.
That makes your not-so-Ciceronian rhetoric work against the point you claim
you want to make and in favor of that made by the intelligent majority,
Alessio Stalla.

--
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi.../c/cf/Friz.jpg
 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Gregorie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On Thu, 26 May 2011 05:54:45 -0700, Alessio Stalla wrote:

> I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
> complexity especially, and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate a
> big DB at a snap of your fingers, and certainly I wouldn't do it *just
> to test one applet*. Would you duplicate an arbitrarily big web
> application to test the new version of a Flash app? Is simplicity not a
> value anymore?
>

Any self-respecting project will have a test version of the server on a
development box. This will be a fully functional, cutting edge version of
the server by definition and will usually only have a small database
since most developers generally don't put more data in it than they need
to support their test cases.

This is the server that should be replicated for client development, not
the production one. As a bonus, somebody has probably already needed to
replicate it in order to develop the existing client programs, so it may
also be easier to install on another development machine.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alessio Stalla
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On May 26, 3:51*pm, Martin Gregorie <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 05:54:45 -0700, Alessio Stalla wrote:
> > I'm not talking about disk space costs, duh! I'm talking about
> > complexity especially, and also time, bandwidth... you can't duplicate a
> > big DB at a snap of your fingers, and certainly I wouldn't do it *just
> > to test one applet*. Would you duplicate an arbitrarily big web
> > application to test the new version of a Flash app? Is simplicity not a
> > value anymore?

>
> Any self-respecting project will have a test version of the server on a
> development box. This will be a fully functional, cutting edge version of
> the server by definition and will usually only have a small database
> since most developers generally don't put more data in it than they need
> to support their test cases.
>
> This is the server that should be replicated for client development, not
> the production one. As a bonus, somebody has probably already needed to
> replicate it in order to develop the existing client programs, so it may
> also be easier to install on another development machine.


Oh, some sanity. I agree. Notice that this is different from the
advice that was given to the OP. Also, since the OP clearly does not
have such a development version of the server available (which is not
necessarily his fault), and he hasn't many resources since it's not
working for profit, "create a development server first" is not a good
answer, in my opinion, when easier alternatives exist (which are not
necessarily advisable in other scenarios, of course). I'm not
advocating against having a development version of the server! I
merely think that it's not an all-or-nothing situation.

Alessio
 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Gregorie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-26-2011
On Thu, 26 May 2011 07:38:47 -0700, Alessio Stalla wrote:

> Oh, some sanity. I agree. Notice that this is different from the advice
> that was given to the OP. Also, since the OP clearly does not have such
> a development version of the server available
>

How do you work that out? There may well be one, since I would hope that
any net-facing outfit would not be stupid enough to do development on or
against the live server. A development server may even be run on the live
server hardware if the owning organisation is really strapped for cash,
but they'd have to be really poor to be reduced to doing that: the box I
run my internal Apache, PostgresQL and mail servers on, a used IBM
NetVista, cost all of £100 back in 2004 and by now would be worth less
than the cost of hauling it away.

However, its not clear whether the OP has asked the right questions to
find out if a clonable development server exists and to get hold of a
copy if it does. All he has said shows a total unwillingness to even
consider doing so.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
 
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
Re: tools for programming applets horos22 Java 2 05-23-2011 11:01 PM
3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLSFOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING ANDMAINTAINING... Oanh Bui C++ 0 04-27-2009 12:51 PM
3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLSFOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING ANDMAINTAINING... Oanh Bui Python 0 04-27-2009 12:46 PM
Article : Security Tools Part -- 2 (.Net FrameWork Tools Series) Namratha Shah \(Nasha\) ASP .Net 0 11-23-2004 04:01 PM



Advertisments