Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcm9pZOKAlFdoeQ==?= Dalvik? Followup-To: comp.lang.java.programmer Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 11:54:06 +1200 Organization: Geek Central Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-86-36.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1306972447 11848 118.92.86.36 (1 Jun 2011 23:54:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ihug.co.nz NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 23:54:07 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.4.11 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4870 In message , Joshua Cranmer wrote: > On 05/31/2011 11:05 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > > Funny. I thought C/C++ was supposed to be portable. C certainly is. “Write once, run everywhere” is more true of C than it is of Java; a portable compiler like GCC means C is the most portable language in the world. > With Java, it doesn't matter which compiler I use to link the binary, they > all the do same thing. Even if I don't program my code in Java. ;-) > > Java has extreme ABI portability--any compiler, any OS, any arch. At the cost of putting the burden on the recipient of your code to figure out how to run a .jar file on their system.