kornel c wrote:
>
> Dear Nathan,
>
> >But, such considerations aside, it is useful to understand what problems
> >are inherent versus what are implementation details. Some of Java's
>
> I do understand memory management. I just don't necessarily want to have to
> care about it in Java: Java is advertised as an environment which will take
> the burden of memory mangement over from you. I would like that promise
> kept, especially because billions of dollars are being invested into this
> technology
> and it's being deployed everywhere.
>
> As one engineer to another: Would you create an application
> which manages memory so wastfully? I can't believe you
> would if you program for a living. Why do you want to silence
> me when I point out a deficiency in the VM? Why are you defending
> an engineering oversight? Isn't it in the best interest of Java to
> point out problems in it?
Whoa, Kornel... we disagree on very little, if anything. You're welcome
to point out deficiencies in the sample implementation, and I hope I'm
welcome to point out that it *is* a sample implementation (which is why
there's a market for companies like TowerJ to create *real*
implementations). If there's anything beyond that we disagree on, I'm
having trouble finding it in the past correspondence. I doubt you're any
more anxious than I am to see Sun start to deliver on the promises.
Nathan
>
> Java seems to be regarded as something almost devine. It is
> almost sacrilegious to criticize it. I'm an engineer and I won't
> think along religious lines. Java, while a wonderful engineering
> achievement and while I was amongst the first to promote it
> years ago, still has problems, memory management being one of
> them. I'll think this even if I get stoned for it.
>
> -kornel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
