Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >> >>> Would someone advise whether the distribution of an obsolete version >>> of java should be reported as a bug; >>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=827 >> >> One *could* argue that Java is a bug, being a) so error-prone, b) so >> vulnerable to attack, and c) so huge and slow, and shouldn't be >> allowed.... > > But you'd be wrong on all counts. I'd argue the opposite - that you > should only be allowed to use languages that work across CPU types and > OS's so as to never be locked into a monopolistic single vendor. No, I wouldn't. You argue wrongly. For one, by your first sentence, you deny all of my arguments, with no reasons for that denial. As someone who's worked more as a programmer than an admin, and both for a long time, in a lot of languages, I see almost all java programs as huge. I also know that *if* you write your code correctly, the code will compile and run on pretty much anything, unless you're writing windowing-system specific stuff. Then there's java, that in everything I read from the mid-nineties through the mid-oughts, was presented as being free from memory errors, etc, etc, but as one huge counter-example, just about every time I see a tomcat app crash, the stack traces are 150-200 calls deep, and there are, indeed, memory errors. Further, it's nothing more than a re-imagining (as they say) of Pascal p-code (quick: what other language besides java used the command writeln?). The difference between recompile and run on a vm that's compiled for that machine is? Oh, right, it is, in effect, another layer that sits on top of the o/s, like a pseudo-os, or windowing system. I can go on... but I really need to get around to writing my article to be entitled, "The Failure of OOP in General, and Java in Particular". mark