Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #4883

Re: Android�Why Dalvik?

From BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Android�Why Dalvik?
Date 2011-06-02 03:32 -0700
Organization albasani.net
Message-ID <is7p25$827$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <is3old$sb2$1@news.albasani.net> <is4a9i$1bh$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <is4gtl$c2e$1@dont-email.me> <is6jev$bi8$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <71meu69511266d561jhov9a8d16d4ko77v@4ax.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/2/2011 2:35 AM, rossum wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 11:54:06 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand>  wrote:
>
>> In message<is4gtl$c2e$1@dont-email.me>, 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.
> To run a .jar file on my system I double click on the file.  I can run
> a C program using the GCC compiler as well but it is a lot more
> trouble than a double click.
>
> On my system a .jar file is immediately runnable while a C source file
> isn't.  C is not "write once run everywhere" it is "write once,
> compile and run everywhere."  Java removes the compile step from the
> user's end.
>
> To me the .jar is more portable.
>

yes, but to be fair though, it is a little less convenient in some cases 
than a native binary would be, such as (AFAIK) on Linux it would be 
necessary to use a shell script to wrap the call to 'java' to make it 
behave more like a native program (from the shell, GNome does file 
associations so will probably wrap this case).

say, "myprogram.sh":
java -jar myprogram.jar ...


I just did a little experiment here, and it seems on modern Windows 
(Win7) one can essentially launch files (jars included) directly from 
the command-line (presumably arguments would be passed to the JVM and be 
parsed correctly, but I didn't test this...). I suspect this is because 
the CMD shell now checks for associations and launches the program.

AFAICT, it one goes and adds JAR to the PATHEXT environment variable, 
then it is no longer necessary to include typing the jar file extension 
when launching JARs.


one could do similar with C files, but alas then this would hinder their 
more useful behavior:
double-click to launch ones' favorite text editor...

well, and as well, C programs are not typically self-contained in a 
single source file, so one would more likely need a Makefile-like 
launcher script of some sort...

then this made me wonder about something... apparently it seems EXE 
files do have file associations in the registry... odd...


then again, I do remember an instance of someone going and messing with 
file associations to break Windows in a relatively amusing way (pretty 
much nothing could be done on the computer, because nearly all actions 
resulted in Notepad windows filled with binary garbage).


it does bring up an idle mystery though as to how much of a central role 
the OS's binary format really needs in an OS, or if it could be largely 
reduced to "just another file format" as far as the kernel is concerned 
(all files launched by associations, including program binaries, just 
with a little bit of a hack for the "main program loader" or similar, 
with the OS possibly allowing secondary loaders with a behavior 
analogous to that of the main loader).


or such...

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-29 12:48 +1200
  Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-28 21:28 -0700
    Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-29 16:56 +1200
      Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-28 23:17 -0700
        Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-29 09:32 -0400
          Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:55 -0700
            Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 12:45 +1200
              Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 19:49 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 16:21 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 22:37 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:12 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 01:03 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:13 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 03:58 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 23:20 +1200
        Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-29 19:52 -0700
          Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 16:20 +1200
            Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-30 01:14 -0400
        Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 00:33 -0700
          Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:54 +1200
            Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 03:26 -0700
              Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 11:24 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:09 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 13:43 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 15:55 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 16:32 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 18:10 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:56 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-31 11:10 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 07:13 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 12:43 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 08:00 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 13:33 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 09:29 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 17:13 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 22:03 +0000
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 16:08 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 21:09 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 09:27 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 22:25 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 15:20 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 12:11 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 07:59 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 15:01 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 15:05 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-01 00:58 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-01 03:21 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:40 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 12:17 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:06 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 16:04 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:42 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-02 11:54 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-01 17:43 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-01 17:43 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 15:08 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-02 20:50 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 17:34 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-02 23:20 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 18:43 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 08:27 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:02 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 22:24 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:29 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-06 14:15 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-07 13:59 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-08 12:55 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 06:18 -0300
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 07:06 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:25 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-08 10:56 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 14:11 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 14:09 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:46 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:08 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:40 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:46 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:26 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 10:23 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-07 13:55 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-08 12:55 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "H.J. Sander Bruggink" <sander.bruggink@uni-due.de> - 2011-06-06 11:21 +0200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 13:40 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "H.J. Sander Bruggink" <sander.bruggink@uni-due.de> - 2011-06-07 10:16 +0200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-07 01:30 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-06-02 10:35 +0100
                Re: Android�Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 03:32 -0700
                Re: Android�Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-02 11:07 -0400
                Re: Android�Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 10:07 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:38 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:21 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:48 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:31 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 12:45 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:14 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:23 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 19:01 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:59 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:44 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 11:11 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:10 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 20:38 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-08 17:28 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 23:41 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:38 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-12 16:59 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-15 14:01 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 22:46 -0700
                Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:39 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-06-03 22:38 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 22:12 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:54 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 14:25 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 08:02 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 14:26 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 11:33 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-31 19:43 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 15:03 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-31 20:15 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-01 01:04 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-01 03:30 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 10:05 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-03 11:16 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:36 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:14 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:47 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:40 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 12:09 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-09 07:55 -0300
                Re: Swing versus Windows.Forms Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-12 17:11 -0300
                Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:43 -0400
                Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-11 14:57 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 13:05 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:13 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-03 21:52 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:52 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:45 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-05 01:04 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 18:52 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-06-06 01:35 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 23:05 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-06-06 06:32 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-06 11:19 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 10:21 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:30 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-07 06:53 -0300
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:37 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 12:26 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 19:12 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 21:58 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:42 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 18:48 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:28 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:51 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:10 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 18:47 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:00 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 22:01 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-05 23:28 +0530
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-05 12:15 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-06 06:25 +0530
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 01:45 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 21:46 +0530
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 12:08 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:16 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 13:32 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Tobias Blass <tobiasblass@gmx.net> - 2011-06-05 20:08 +0000
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-05 14:55 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-05 14:53 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 18:50 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-11 23:56 +0530
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:14 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 13:38 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-06-07 13:34 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-06-07 13:56 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-06-07 16:47 +0000
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:53 +1200
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 19:14 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 22:26 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 18:45 +1200
              Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-30 15:25 -0400
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 12:46 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 11:50 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-30 20:16 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:50 +1200
            Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 11:22 -0700
    Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:35 -0700
      Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 12:44 +1200
        Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 19:38 -0700
          Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 17:26 +1200
            Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 00:04 -0700
              Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:11 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 00:30 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:53 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 01:28 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:12 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 02:35 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-05-30 11:26 -0400
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:17 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 11:48 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 17:16 -0700
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:48 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? David Segall <david@address.invalid> - 2011-06-01 00:54 +1000
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 08:05 -0700
                Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 11:41 -0700
            Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 01:57 -0700
              Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:30 +1200
                Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:23 -0700
  Re: Android—Why Dalvik? bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-05-31 09:42 +0100
  Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:17 +0200
    Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:21 +0200
    Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-02 19:34 +1200
      Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 03:43 -0700

csiph-web