So out of 93000 employees, they have 13 dedicated to looking at OpenOffice and Linux? Yeah, sounds to me like they are covering their bases more than anything else.
Actually, can you append the konqueror version you are using? I just tried and it passed everything for me. I'm using Konqueror from the KDE 3.1 branch.
In any case, it's not a vanilla copy of khtml, you can find a change log here.
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kfm-devel&m=10419691231632 6&w=2.
You know what ? If you don't believe me, ( and I hate to put a third party in this), but I feel I must clear this accusation.
A few months ago, one of the speakers at a Linux show in Montréal was Mike Shaver. M. Shaver gave a big long speech about portability, ( well not that long ) and one the attendees asked why didn't they use Java instead of C++ for Mozilla. Is answer was : "Java is not that portable". If you ever see him, ask him.
I have to admid that I'm not confortable bringing somebody else into this. I feel I must explain why I did this, I have been involved in Linux for a long time, but have never really participated in community activities like slashdot. I don't know if calling somebody a liar is standard here on slashdot, but I don't like it when somebody calls me a liar.
I'm not a liar. I'm sorry if these facts offended you.
For the evidence, look at Sun's java sites. Ddj (or is it cuj?) did an article on this recently.
For portability, I was talking about the differences in JVM. If a method is buggy in one JVM and not in the other, well you get the picture. I was also talking about methods being deprecated, some of these deprecations are justified, but some are not. Like deprecating a method just to add set/get in front of it.
For the code, unfortunately the code is owned by my employer.
I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying to me, but I would like to hear more about it. Maybe if you wrote I small snippet of code of pseudo-java, I would understand more clearly.
Ok, once again, how big are the programs you are writing?
>What JDK did you use? JDK from 1.0.2 to 1.2.2. Maybe you haven't noticed, but sun keeps deprecating stuff left and right.
I'm not sure I understand your arguments about templates.
>The actual class files generated are virtually >identical to class files generated with JDK 1.0.x >to JDK 1.3
C++ templates are Generic Programming.
C++ templates are expanded at compile-time to produce classes.
If you were to clearly explain to me why C++ is NOT becoming Java, I could probably explain to you why they are the same.
I have been programming C++ for 7 years, and I have been programming in Java since it began. For anything that you code in Java, I can reproduce easily in C++ using the same sematics.
I gave encapsulation has an example. I said, that OO was a state of mind. Just because you have polymorphism, inheritance and encapsulation does not mean that you can be "branded" OO either.
For example, there is a form of inheritance in the Linux kernel. Drivers that do not implement members of their specific interfaces can use defaults, the defaults ressemble that of a child class inheriting some methods from it's parent, etc.
More to the point, ANSI C guarantees that if you have
struct list{ list* next; };
struct list_int{ list_int* next; int element; };
Than list_int can be use everywhere that list can. This is the same thing,
Really, have you seen the mozilla project, why do you think the core of it is in C++ and not in Java. KDE runs on practically on all unices.
Just go IRC Java channels, ask them what JDK you should use if you want to be portable, JDK 1.0.2 is at most the earlist version you can. Bugs in implementation and documentation keep you from using newer versions. Even with 1.0.2, you'll need to reimplement functions that simply don't work.
(C++ is pretty nasty compared with for instance Java.)
Why are you saying this? Java is getting to be more and more like C++. For example, templates will probably be added to the next version. And the reason why these new features are being added is cuz there actually missed by C++ programmes that write Java. I had to write Java once, and I would not go back. It's buggy, it's slow and it's not PORTABLE. Write once, run everywhere, right! Write once, DEBUG everywhere is more like it.
Just because the Linux kernel is written in C doesn't mean it's not OO. OO is a state of mind, a philosophy, you can write the OO way with assembly if you want. The Linux kernel is OO. Structures where all the members are pointers to functions look a lot like C++ or Java classes, they define strict interfaces to different components. These interfaces provide encapsulation(OO) do the actual data. The only difference is construction and destruction is done manually. Other OO tecniques may be harder to achieve in C, but still possible.
Slashdot Mirror
So out of 93000 employees, they have 13 dedicated to looking at OpenOffice and Linux? Yeah, sounds to me like they are covering their bases more than anything else.
Actually, can you append the konqueror version you are using? I just tried and it passed everything for me. I'm using Konqueror from the KDE 3.1 branch. In any case, it's not a vanilla copy of khtml, you can find a change log here. http://lists.kde.org/?l=kfm-devel&m=10419691231632 6&w=2.
You know what ? If you don't believe me, ( and I hate to put a third party in this), but I feel I must clear this accusation.
A few months ago, one of the speakers at a Linux show in Montréal was Mike Shaver. M. Shaver gave a big long speech about portability, ( well not that long ) and one the attendees asked why didn't they use Java instead of C++ for Mozilla. Is answer was : "Java is not that portable". If you ever see him, ask him.
I have to admid that I'm not confortable bringing somebody else into this. I feel I must explain why I did this, I have been involved in Linux for a long time, but have never really participated in community activities like slashdot. I don't know if calling somebody a liar is standard here on slashdot, but I don't like it when somebody calls me a liar.
I'm not a liar. I'm sorry if these facts offended you.
For the evidence, look at Sun's java sites. Ddj (or is it cuj?) did an article on this recently.
For portability, I was talking about the differences in JVM. If a method is buggy in one JVM and not in the other, well you get the picture. I was also talking about methods being deprecated, some of these deprecations are justified, but some are not. Like deprecating a method just to add set/get in front of it.
For the code, unfortunately the code is owned by my employer.
Again, let me reaffirm that I not lying.
I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying to me, but I would like to hear more about it. Maybe if you wrote I small snippet of code of pseudo-java, I would understand more clearly.
Ok, once again, how big are the programs you are writing?
>What JDK did you use?
JDK from 1.0.2 to 1.2.2. Maybe you haven't noticed, but sun keeps deprecating stuff left and right.
I'm not sure I understand your arguments about templates.
>The actual class files generated are virtually >identical to class files generated with JDK 1.0.x >to JDK 1.3
C++ templates are Generic Programming.
C++ templates are expanded at compile-time to produce classes.
If you were to clearly explain to me why C++ is NOT becoming Java, I could probably explain to you why they are the same.
I have been programming C++ for 7 years, and I have been programming in Java since it began. For anything that you code in Java, I can reproduce easily in C++ using the same sematics.
I gave encapsulation has an example. I said, that OO was a state of mind. Just because you have polymorphism, inheritance and encapsulation does not mean that you can be "branded" OO either.
For example, there is a form of inheritance in the Linux kernel. Drivers that do not implement members of their specific interfaces can use defaults, the defaults ressemble that of a child class inheriting some methods from it's parent, etc.
More to the point, ANSI C guarantees that if you have
struct list{
list* next;
};
struct list_int{
list_int* next;
int element;
};
Than list_int can be use everywhere that list can. This is the same thing,
struct list_int : public list{
int element;
};
in C++
If you don't mind me asking, just how big are those apps of yours, what jdk are you using.
If C++ feels so backwards why is it that keep adding stuff to Java to make it look more and more like C++.
Finally, don't you realize that if you limit the features that you use in C++, you get Java.
Really, have you seen the mozilla project, why do you think the core of it is in C++ and not in Java. KDE runs on practically on all unices.
Just go IRC Java channels, ask them what JDK you should use if you want to be portable, JDK 1.0.2 is at most the earlist version you can. Bugs in implementation and documentation keep you from using newer versions. Even with 1.0.2, you'll need to reimplement functions that simply don't work.
(C++ is pretty nasty compared with for instance Java.)
Why are you saying this? Java is getting to be more and more like C++. For example, templates will probably be added to the next version. And the reason why these new features are being added is cuz there actually missed by C++ programmes that write Java. I had to write Java once, and I would not go back. It's buggy, it's slow and it's not PORTABLE. Write once, run everywhere, right! Write once, DEBUG everywhere is more like it.
Just because the Linux kernel is written in C doesn't mean it's not OO. OO is a state of mind, a philosophy, you can write the OO way with assembly if you want. The Linux kernel is OO. Structures where all the members are pointers to functions look a lot like C++ or Java classes, they define strict interfaces to different components. These interfaces provide encapsulation(OO) do the actual data. The only difference is construction and destruction is done manually. Other OO tecniques may be harder to achieve in C, but still possible.