On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 07:56 Zahid Rahman <zahidr1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The space and defence don't share what they are doing. So I don't think > yours is reasonable statement that you know what is happening in the > aerospace and defence industry. Hm. I don't think your assumption that I haven't done defense contracting is a reasonable one, but we'll agree to disagree on that one. (If you're wondering, encrypted radio systems, and consulting on guidance systems. And I still know the people I worked with--and people that use the systems or their descendents.) FWIW: you're going to find people with a pretty wide background in this group, many with decades of experience across a full spectrum of domains. Speaking for myself, I come from both embedded and application development going on 30+ years now. I know others here have similar time in the trenches. None of us are resistant to new ideas or ways of looking at things--but we have an appreciation for factual claims and accurate representations. Anyway you jumped to a conclusion of reverse engineering when I was > referring to the benefit of traceability when using interpretive code. I "jumped" to reverse engineering because you specifically said an advantage of Java was decompilation (not unique to Java), and that's a primary component of reverse engineering almost by definition. d. -- em: davelnew...@gmail.com mo: 908-380-8699 tw: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton> li: dave-newton <https://www.linkedin.com/in/dave-newton/> gh: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton> so: Dave Newton <http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton> bl[0]: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/> bl[1]: Maker's End Blog <https://blog.makersend.com> sk: davelnewton_skype
