Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lew Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: tools for programming applets Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 09:28:35 -0400 Organization: albasani.net Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: <028d2009-98b7-43a3-b02d-83eaa89db79e@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> <41dd1d4d-400b-4801-81cd-0136cc505faf@y27g2000prb.googlegroups.com> <7be10367-5f4b-4738-a5f5-0b6eb2769dd3@r33g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <884c9970-4a08-4606-8aff-a4b47e945134@q32g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <189c56f0-f2c4-4059-aa3b-11aab6c79c57@j31g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.albasani.net /1lyQf+t3t5gmxE546SguH4K6NkZYvXL3YGkRJzmPseeDlJ3MK4zJeBzhIU4FYCc5TsHUx0Cie90JqLRBPZSOZCxZ6sE7yTX1Us4NcrmhEOTKyVOW2bShZhK+bXDiLrv NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 13:27:58 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="TJClGsNanDZWvj5eSPRAU+trKYAjXljMZOe74p7HRPFviD4SJpIKM7QfsLOJ/Px9/fYG/KeetRW52kYxhyr4d4/HeLq6dtnokw/ZDk+tji6pnC8nyr6CVRzopcBLT3ZZ"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10 In-Reply-To: <189c56f0-f2c4-4059-aa3b-11aab6c79c57@j31g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:/cw1XB4Q7k6Px2EZBS/LX/wUnEY= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4600 Alessio Stalla wrote: > Ok, I give up. Appropriate. > Maybe I simply see things differently from the majority of Java developers. I just cannot imagine to always have to clone a > server in order to test a client. Do you really think that e.g. Google > cloned the entire Youtube [sic] to develop their HTML5 player? Irrelevant and false analogy. I conclude that you haven't a valid point if you have to reach like that. You don't get to reframe the point in such a ludicrous straw-man fashion. Well, you have a right to try, but it doesn't change the truth that you are trying to resist. No one suggested that cloning YouTube is necessary to test a browser. We did suggest, correctly, that the applet security mechanism is designed to prevent exactly what the OP requested, that there were good reasons for that, that there were better ways to develop an applet that didn't have a problem with the security restrictions, and that the overhead of setting up a single development workstation with the resources to simulate the OP's production box (a single node, a fact you overlooked in your eagerness to proffer useless rhetoric) was minimal. All those things are true. It is also true that Google does test even large-scale applications on a separate infrastructure from its production servers for exactly the reasons "the majority of Java developers", who actually know what we're talking about. There's a reason why so many people agree with the truth, Alessio Stalla. That makes your not-so-Ciceronian rhetoric work against the point you claim you want to make and in favor of that made by the intelligent majority, Alessio Stalla. -- Lew Honi soit qui mal y pense. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg