Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. How about including Java as one of the .NET supported languages?

How about including Java as one of the .NET supported languages?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpjavaquestion
41 Posts 29 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • T Thornik

    Unfortunately, your "DOS code" nowadays is a funny "piece of enterprise" - its "close to flat" complexity allowed you to make it portable between... compatible MS-DOS clones! :) Now do the same trick with Solaris, Windows, Linux, QNX, OS/2, god-knows-what and you'll fail. Esp. when your system has thousands LOC with many layers, web/native-clients, distributed around the world and has replaceable modules. Definitely just "one language" cannot achieve it. Moreover: SUN never even had so many specialists to be sure all Java implementations can be portable to everywhere. > If portability is a requirement.... Java is clearly an option... Just repetition of well-known myth. Where is your arguments? First, Java IS NOT compatible around implementations (google it) and second, nobody requires this "portability" - all companies works on what they have.

    C Offline
    C Offline
    cpkilekofp
    wrote on last edited by
    #41

    Member 3082487 wrote:

    - its "close to flat" complexity allowed you to make it portable between... compatible MS-DOS clones! :)

    CP/M was not an MS/DOS system, nor vice versa. I've also compiled and extended code that ported to Unix, VAX VMS, and MS-DOS; the C User's Group has a number of such utilities in source code.

    Member 3082487 wrote:

    Now do the same trick with Solaris, Windows, Linux, QNX, OS/2, god-knows-what and you'll fail.

    Have you tried?? I doubt it. On the other hand, I have. You isolate the OS-dependent bits behind abstraction layers. It just as easy (or as complex) as hiding the actual connection procedure to a database behind a database layer. I didn't say it was easy, or that there aren't some systems that it doesn't make sense to build into portable code. I specifically said that some pieces of business logic need to be available on a variety of different architectures, not that every possible implementation of every piece of code needs to be made portable.

    Member 3082487 wrote:

    Just repetition of well-known myth. Where is your arguments?

    First and only argument: There IS portable code that HAS been ported and IS running the same business logic on a lot of machinces in a lot of companies. Existence trumps ignorant assumption.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • Users
    • Groups