Re: VB and Access == Java and ????

1998-05-27 Thread Azazel

Might JDBC give you the access you need to your data?  I know it's
helped me avoid
a fair bit of VB.




Re: java 1.2 ??

1998-06-09 Thread Azazel

According to the FAQ (http://www.place.org/~stevemw/java/FAQ/FAQ-java-linux.html):

> 2.5 When is the JDK 1.2 Going to be Released for Linux?
> 
> According to Steve Byrne on Monday, May 26th 1998: 
> 
>  JavaSoft is trying very hard to get a license set up with an external person
>  to coordinate the 1.2 Linux porting effort.  The plan is not to have to wait
>  until 1.2 ships, but to get things underway much sooner (1.2 is huge, and
>  involves lots more machine specific components, and will take a while to port).

HTH,

Az. >-)=




Re: JDK1.1.5 with RedHat

1998-06-11 Thread Azazel

Erm, you didn't want the libc version if you're running 5.0.  I know
from bitter experience: all sorts of things started crashing after I
installed 5.4.44.  You want the glibc version and to try to get rid
of libc 5.4.44 and co..  I took the rather drastic measure of scrub-
bing my box and upgrading to 5.1 while I was at it but I may simply
have been too much of a newbie to know how to undo what I had done.

Good luck.

Paris Flegas wrote:
> 
> I have the same problem.
> I installed the libc version.
> I also tried jdk 1.1.6 and nothing changed.
> I have installed the latest version of libc 5.4.44 and ld.so
> I ' d b egrateful if you helped me.
> 
> On 11 Jun 1998, Preben Randhol wrote:
> 
> > * "this is Zhao, Lenny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > | hi guys, I am not sure if anyone experence this problem before. After I
> > | installed 1.1.5 under RedHat5.0, I just typed "javac"to see if it is
> > | working, it give a me segmentation fault(core dump). It supposed to give
> >
> > did you install the glibc version?
> >
> > --
> > Preben Randhol| Linux was made by foreign terrorists
> > Tlf73940929/(735)94076 [arb]  | to take money from true US
> > Email  [EMAIL PROTECTED]| companies like Microsoft.
> > http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/  |  -- Some AOL'er.
> >




Re: Survey, what tool do you use?

1998-06-18 Thread Azazel

Pico?  Pah!  Try vi.  Grr! :)

Az.

Dustin Lang wrote:
> 
> >   What development tool do you use to help on daily coding?
> 
> pico :)
> 
> dstn.




Javac

1998-06-02 Thread Azazel

Help?  I've installed jdk1.1.5-v7 under Redhat 5.1 and all
of a sudden (it was fine under 5.0) I get the following:

> [azazel@anubis ~/misc]$ javac Test.java
> No library path set.

I'm sure I'm being an idiot but I just can't see the wood
for the trees at the moment.

Ta,

Az.




Re: Javac

1998-06-03 Thread Azazel

Doh!  I *knew* there was something I was missing: I
should have read the FAQ.  Fixed in five minutes. :)

Thanks, folks.

Az. >-)=

Stephen Wynne wrote:
> 
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Azazel writes:
> 
> Help?  I've installed jdk1.1.5-v7 under Redhat 5.1 and all
> of a sudden (it was fine under 5.0) I get the following:
> 
> > [azazel@anubis ~/misc]$ javac Test.java
> > No library path set.
> 
> I'm sure I'm being an idiot but I just can't see the wood
> for the trees at the moment.
> 
> Az,
> 
> I suspect Kaffe. Check the FAQ:
> http://www.place.org/~stevemw/java/FAQ/FAQ-java-linux.html
> 
> Steve
> 
>




Re: RH5.0 and JDK1.1.?

1998-06-09 Thread Azazel

> > Also, is there a working Netscape for RH5.0?
> >
> 
> My copy is 4.05, and it works fine.

Has anyone managed to get JDK1.1-complete preview version
of 4.05 working under RH 5.0/5.1?  The Java was decidedly
flaky, when I installed it.

Az. >-)=




Netscape 4.05

1998-06-09 Thread Azazel

I've just installed the JDK1.1 prerelease again and this time I sorted
out the problem that cropped up last time, that I needed to have the
Netscape archive (${MOZILLA_HOME}/java/classes/java40.jar) before the
JDK archive in $CLASSPATH, - or so I thought.

This had the unfortunate effect of confusing the JDK binaries which
got to the NS jar first too.  I've taken the NS jar out of the default
classpath and written a 5-line script to put it back in for Netscape.
This *seems* to work.  I know some of you have 4.05-with-1.1 up and
running and I was wondering whether you had had all this fuss and bother.




Re: Sun vs microsoft? RE:We Won!

1998-11-18 Thread Azazel


> 
> On Wed, 18 Nov 1998, Glenn Valenta wrote:
> 
> > >Hey, did everyone notice that Sun won it's java suit against microsoft
> > >today?  The judge granted us an injunction and Microsoft has to start
> > >shipping a Java implementation that complies with the test suites or
> > >quit shipping windows in 90 days.
> > >
> > >Woo hoo, no wonder our stock went up almost $4 today!!!
> >
> > Is it true?
> >
> > if so...
> > Vbeers for everybody!!!
> 
>   if so, it means that there can indeed be justice in cyberland after all.
> 
>   may the evil doers suffer from gas...


It's a step in the right direction.  M$ has 90 days to fix things.
Whether they will and whether they'll find a way of sliming out of
this obligation is an open question.  Call me paranoid but until I
see M$ in pieces and/or Gates destitute and begging in the gutter
I will not rest easy.  Apart from the matter of appeals, this is
only a temporary injunction and not a final decision:  the case
has not gone to trial.

Az.

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0
  www:  http://www.azazel.net/
  mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0



Re: Equivalence

1998-07-28 Thread Azazel


> 
> Hi PPL,
> 
> I am new to this JDK...
> 
> I would like to know the equivalent of UNIX crypt with salt
> in Java..


Hear, hear.  Haven't had any joy finding this, so I'm writing one.
I'll let you know if/when I get it finished. :)
 
+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+

www:http://www.elephant.org/~azazel/
mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+



Bitwise operators

1998-08-03 Thread Azazel

I'm out of patience and ideas.  Can somebody tell me why the following code gives the
output it does.  The programme should take a given long number, shift it 8 bits each
way (signed and unsigned), and print all the different bit-patterns.  As I see it, one
of two things is happening.

1.  There's a bug in the JDK and bitwise operators don't work properly, which
seems unlikely.
2.  The dprint function is not printing the actual bit-strings but I can't see why.


public class pubtest
{
public static void main(String args[])
{
long n;

n=0xf0f0f0f0;

System.out.print("n:\t");
dprint(n);
System.out.print("n>>8:\t");
dprint(n>>8);
System.out.print("n>>>8:\t");
dprint(n>>>8);
System.out.print("n<<8:\t");
dprint(n<<8);

n=0x0f0f0f0f;

System.out.print("n:\t");
dprint(n);
System.out.print("n>>8:\t");
dprint(n>>8);
System.out.print("n>>>8:\t");
dprint(n>>>8);
System.out.print("n<<8:\t");
dprint(n<<8);
}

private static long dprint(long l)
{
for(int i=1<<31; i!=0; i>>>=1)
System.err.print((l&i)!=0?"1":"0");
System.err.print("\n");

return l;
}
} 



n:  
n>>8:   
n>>>8:  
n<<8:   
n:  00001111
n>>8:   
n>>>8:  
n<<8:   1000


Cheers,

J.

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+

www:http://www.elephant.org/~azazel/
mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+



Re: Bitwise Operators.

1998-08-04 Thread Azazel

Thanks chaps: the operators are now doing what I hoped.
Learnt a valuable lesson today: if one is going to twiddle
bits it helps if one is familiar with the bits one is
twiddling. :)

J.

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+

www:http://www.elephant.org/~azazel/
mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+



Re: java versus c++ or perl

1999-05-07 Thread Azazel



> Java also has the advantage that Perl (AFAIK--I'm not even a Perl newbie)
> lacks in that Java has JNI, which would allow you to "call down" to C++
> code if necessary.


Not true actually:  a lot of the big Perl modules have cores written in
C with stubs in Perl to allow one to call them easily.  The Perl interface
to PostgreSQL is the first example which comes to mind.  To make life even
more interesting, I imagine it's only a matter of time before it becomes
possible to run Java from Perl and vice versa (assuming it isn't already).

Ted's general point is correct tho: different langs suit different people
and different projects, although if you decided on COBOL or something you'd
obviously be quite mad. :)

Az.

+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0
  www:  http://www.azazel.net/
  mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]