> And then there's "write once, run anywhere." Yeah ... right. I've run > Java applets, and Javascript applets, and the latter are vastly superior > for performance, and worse, all too often the Java applets are not "run > anywhere", they only run on very specific JVM implementations.
You really can't judge java based on java applets; they are a really poor front, for reasons I assume you are aware. > There's the nice property that bytecode can be type safe. I really like > that. But the bytecode checker is slow; do people really run it > habitually? More important; is type safety a valuable property for > *untrusted code* that you are going to have to sandbox anyway? I believe major application servers run with -verify, which is appropriate and useful for them. > So I give up; what is it that's so great about bytecode? It looks a > *lot* like the Emperor is not wearing clothes to me. I think you just want to see him that way ;) > Crispin -- mic _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
