-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler writes: >At 10:28 AM 3/11/2004, Mark A. DeMichele wrote: >>Has anyone ever talked about porting the entire SA to java. > >Nope, that's new to me. And I for one can't see that the benefits would be >very significant, except to windows users. Certainly not enough to outweigh >the effort. > >>I think it would make it more easily installed and run on multiple >>platforms, especially Windows. > >The latter half (re: windows) is true, the latter half is debatable. I've >seen more unix boxes with perl support than java support.. > >>Not to mention the source code would probably be a lot more readable. As >>you can tell, I'm a Perl novice. I'm a pretty advanced java and Delphi >>programmer. I can program and read C++ and C, but I don't do it a lot so >>I'm not as good. I'm learning C# which it pretty much the same as >>java. I've also programmed in many other scripting languages. I have to >>say, that reading Perl code is probably the most difficult code to >>understand, excluding assembly language. I give you Perl guys a lot of >>credit. I'm not sure I could ever efficiently write a full Perl >>application. The code is so strange looking. > >I thin the "code would probably be a lot more readable" is a very >subjective thing. I know a smidge of perl, and am a excellent C and C++.. I >find Java extraordinarily weird and tough to read, as I don't know the >language. > >And, lets face it, the sa-devel team is for the most part perl >programmers.. I'm sure several know java, but I'd be surprised if they were >all as good at java as they are at perl. So, in doing a port, you'd need a >new devel team. Plus this one, at least, spent a couple of years writing java code, and far prefers perl to java ;) - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAUKkUQTcbUG5Y7woRAkHzAJ4xax+P/KNegeMgcYC66F/KI8n78ACfYm82 MWMFbNv5C8Z30VsB9ZJk064= =BZV3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
