-Matt
On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:19 PM, Sean A Corfield wrote:
On Mar 16, 2004, at 2:51 PM, Matt Liotta wrote:There is a slippery slope that all the vendors are standing on top of. A language specification is the only answer.
I can point to any number of languages with ANSI and ISO standards that have many differing implementations and portability problems. That's not to say "standards are bad" - I wouldn't have spent nearly a decade working on the ISO and ANSI C++ committees if I'd believed that (and I also expended effort on both C's standardization and various attempts to standardize Java - Sun wouldn't give the language up to the standards community).
The Java community probably has the least portability and compatibility problems of any language that has many implementations (EJBs excepted, perhaps). I believe that is at least partly due to the tight control Sun has maintained over the language. I don't entirely agree with that policy (hence I worked with IST/5/-/53 and other organizations to try to persuade Sun to let us standardize Java back in the late 90's), but it has proved remarkably effective...
Regards, Sean
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
