On 8/11/05, Michael Halcrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I learned Java as my very first OO language back in '96, so it holds a > special place in my heart as my first OO love. It has since been > replaced by a younger, more sexy O'Caml. My primary complaint about > Java is the fact that it seems as if every vendor that ships a Java > application also includes a particular JVM that is the only one that > can actually run that application. Given that fact, something like GCJ > makes a lot of sense.
I totally agree. I dislike the fact that so many java apps come bundled with a 15M JVM included. Granted this make things easy on the person installing, but it's a wasteful way to distribute software. Could you imagine everyone who shipped a perl app bundling the perl runtime? GCJ will help because everyone already has it, and if a newer version is needed, yum/apt/emerge will get it. However, I think that Apache's Harmony JVM will end up being a better long term OSS solution for Java. But either way (GCJ or Harmony) an open-source JVM would really help cut down on the need to distribute a JVM with your app. Read more about Harmony here: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5798290.html -Bryan .-----------------------------------. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `-----------------------------------'
