Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #4691 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-05-29 12:48 +1200 |
| Last post | 2011-06-02 03:43 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 213 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-29 12:48 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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: AndroidWhy 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
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 08:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.28529d2a1a7ef8f598977d@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #4926 |
In article <is9vpq$9u7$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... > >> Most Linux distros' installers install a JVM by default, OS X also > > installs a JVM by default, and at least one major PC manufacturer > > includes Java on their desktop computers (that'd be the 2nd largest - > > Dell - I am not sure about the others). > > Notable omission from that list... Don't be coy. What's the omission? -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 16:02 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <iscapj$l7l$5@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4943 |
In message <MPG.28529d2a1a7ef8f598977d@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: > Don't be coy. What's the omission? MICROSOFT WINDOWS!!!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 22:24 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.28536165c19ea16098977f@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #4970 |
In article <iscapj$l7l$5@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... > > In message <MPG.28529d2a1a7ef8f598977d@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: > > > Don't be coy. What's the omission? > > MICROSOFT WINDOWS!!!!!! What do you think most Dell PC's run, bozo? (Yes, you can order certain models with Linux, but most Dell PC's aren't sold with Linux.) So, you weren't being coy... you were being stupid. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <54equ61922jfjrk8aufgc2cn9qi5p5oo23@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #4974 |
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 22:24:30 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:
>In article <iscapj$l7l$5@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says...
>>
>> In message <MPG.28529d2a1a7ef8f598977d@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote:
>>
>> > Don't be coy. What's the omission?
>>
>> MICROSOFT WINDOWS!!!!!!
>
>What do you think most Dell PC's run, bozo?
>
>(Yes, you can order certain models with Linux, but most Dell PC's aren't
>sold with Linux.)
>
>So, you weren't being coy... you were being stupid.
Mr. Sobol, I would like to compliment you on your excellent
manners.
As soon as you show some, please let me know, and I will
compliment you.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 14:15 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.2856e335f603f827989783@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #5032 |
In article <54equ61922jfjrk8aufgc2cn9qi5p5oo23@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko says... > Mr. Sobol, I would like to compliment you on your excellent > manners. > > As soon as you show some, please let me know, and I will > compliment you. Thanks, but I don't need compliments from you. I have little tolerance for Lawrence's debate tactics, which ARE stupid. I'm a pretty blunt, shoot-from-the-hip kinda guy. You, on the other hand, are someone who apparently just decided to jump into this discussion and not add anything useful to it. Have a nice life. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 13:59 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <h34tu6tcrjv41unp0939ktjm5dommig507@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5036 |
On Mon, 6 Jun 2011 14:15:07 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:
>In article <54equ61922jfjrk8aufgc2cn9qi5p5oo23@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko
>says...
>> Mr. Sobol, I would like to compliment you on your excellent
>> manners.
>>
>> As soon as you show some, please let me know, and I will
>> compliment you.
>Thanks, but I don't need compliments from you.
>
>I have little tolerance for Lawrence's debate tactics, which ARE stupid.
>I'm a pretty blunt, shoot-from-the-hip kinda guy.
And if you are not careful with that, you will alienate people
rather quickly. I will leave it to you to determine whether doing so
is wise or not.
>You, on the other hand, are someone who apparently just decided to jump
>into this discussion and not add anything useful to it.
Oh, it is quite useful. You need not use it, and I see that you
are not.
>Have a nice life.
I intend to.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 12:55 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <ismh9e$ikc$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #5073 |
In message <h34tu6tcrjv41unp0939ktjm5dommig507@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > And if you are not careful with that, you will alienate people > rather quickly. I will leave it to you to determine whether doing so > is wise or not. Don’t worry about him. I come across this sort of bullshit all the time. You can tell the type: when they find they’re on the losing end of the argument, they resort to abusive, ad-hominem attacks. This way, they hope to distract attention from the actual point. The trick is to keep bringing them back to the point. Sometimes this makes them angrier, which can be a source of amusement in itself. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 06:18 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <Y7HHp.711$x11.489@newsfe09.iad> |
| In reply to | #5080 |
On 11-06-07 09:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <h34tu6tcrjv41unp0939ktjm5dommig507@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko > wrote: > >> And if you are not careful with that, you will alienate people >> rather quickly. I will leave it to you to determine whether doing so >> is wise or not. > > Don’t worry about him. I come across this sort of bullshit all the time. You > can tell the type: when they find they’re on the losing end of the argument, > they resort to abusive, ad-hominem attacks. This way, they hope to distract > attention from the actual point. The trick is to keep bringing them back to > the point. > > Sometimes this makes them angrier, which can be a source of amusement in > itself. :) "I come across this sort of bullshit all the time". There is a simple, glaringly obvious reason for that. Albeit not the one you cherish. AHS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 07:06 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.285921de92f2a0b5989788@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #5086 |
In article <Y7HHp.711$x11.489@newsfe09.iad>, Arved Sandstrom says... > There is a simple, glaringly obvious reason for that. Albeit not the one > you cherish. Don't forget what led to my original assessment of him: he was intentionally ignoring facts in an attempt to win an argument. So, he and his friend can say whatever they want to about me; I stand by my assessment of him, that he is a stupid troll. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 10:25 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <iso6ar02sr7@news4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #5089 |
Steve Sobol wrote: > > So, he and his friend can say whatever they want to about me I don't know that Gene Wirchenko is Lawrence's friend. He *is* a relative Usenet old-timer, having been posting since the mid-1990s (since 1995, I think), and like most of us Usenet fogeys has some opinions about the medium. He's also a contributor to RISKS and other forums. You certainly needn't agree with him, but I wouldn't recommend ignoring him out of spite, either. -- Michael Wojcik Micro Focus Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 10:56 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <eqdvu6pdpnq6lialniv80h9novvkdh8bdm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5107 |
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:25:12 -0400, Michael Wojcik
<mwojcik@newsguy.com> wrote:
>Steve Sobol wrote:
>>
>> So, he and his friend can say whatever they want to about me
>
>I don't know that Gene Wirchenko is Lawrence's friend. He *is* a
I am not.
>relative Usenet old-timer, having been posting since the mid-1990s
>(since 1995, I think), and like most of us Usenet fogeys has some
Yes. Coincidentally the end of September, but no matter.
>opinions about the medium. He's also a contributor to RISKS and other
And of manners in general.
>forums. You certainly needn't agree with him, but I wouldn't recommend
RISKS is great, and I am pleased to be able to contribute.
>ignoring him out of spite, either.
Quite.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 14:11 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.28598551cdf3f04298978b@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #5119 |
In article <eqdvu6pdpnq6lialniv80h9novvkdh8bdm@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko says... > >opinions about the medium > And of manners in general. Fine. You have a right to your opinions, of course. I have a right to tell you to go pound salt if I don't want to listen to you lecturing me. As I just posted in a reply to Michael Wojcik, if you actually want to contribute to the discussion, I will certainly welcome your contributions. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 14:09 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.285984e84f2cc12198978a@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #5107 |
In article <iso6ar02sr7@news4.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik says... > > So, he and his friend can say whatever they want to about me > > I don't know that Gene Wirchenko is Lawrence's friend. He *is* a > relative Usenet old-timer, having been posting since the mid-1990s I've been on Usenet since late 1989-early 1990. > (since 1995, I think), and like most of us Usenet fogeys has some > opinions about the medium. He's also a contributor to RISKS and other > forums. You certainly needn't agree with him, but I wouldn't recommend > ignoring him out of spite, either. His technical prowess may be impressive. I just don't have time to listen to people who want to lecture me on Usenet. Lawrence is a troll; he resorts to underhanded, obnoxious tactics to advance his side of the argument/discussion he's involved in, and I called him on it. Yes, I was blunt. Yes, what I said could definitely be considered offensive and/or obnoxious. No, I'm not retracting my statement. Admonishing me was one of the first things Gene did, upon entering the discussion. If he actually wants to *participate* in the discussion and contribute to it, I welcome his input. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 09:46 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <isaq5i41eti@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #4871 |
Steve Sobol wrote:
> In article <is6jev$bi8$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says...
>> In message <is4gtl$c2e$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>>>
>>> Funny. I thought C/C++ was supposed to be portable.
>> C certainly is. ?Write once, run everywhere? is more true of C than it is of
>> Java; a portable compiler like GCC means C is the most portable language in
>> the world.
Ah, argument by repeated assertion. This is still bullshit, insofar as
it's anything at all. ("the most portable language in the world" is a
vapid claim, since "portable" is not well-defined and there's no
metric for "most".)
> Well, technically, you still have to have a gcc compiler available for
> your platform, but gcc *is* available on every popular platform *I* can
> think of. More importantly, you have to rebuild from source each time
> you deploy your app to a new platform. You don't, with Java.
Recompiling arbitrary C source on a new platform only produces a
working binary if the C source doesn't make any invalid assumptions
about the implementation. It's rare to find non-trivial C source that
doesn't make assumptions about the implementation: CHAR_BIT,
endianness, character set, etc.
--
Michael Wojcik
Micro Focus
Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 16:08 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <iscb49$lih$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4937 |
In message <isaq5i41eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote:
> ("the most portable language in the world" is a
> vapid claim, since "portable" is not well-defined and there's no
> metric for "most".)
Most languages (including Java) that claim to be “portable” seem to be
implemented in C. Therefore they can only be ported to platforms where a C
compiler (or cross-compiler) is already available. Therefore,
Portability(all such languages) ⊆ Portability(C)
or even
Portability(all such languages apart from C) ⊂ Portability(C)
> It's rare to find non-trivial C source that
> doesn't make assumptions about the implementation: CHAR_BIT,
> endianness, character set, etc.
Try this <http://www.blender.org/>. Is a million lines “non-trivial” enough
for you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 02:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isck0f$79m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4971 |
On 06/04/2011 12:08 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message<isaq5i41eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote:
>
>> ("the most portable language in the world" is a
>> vapid claim, since "portable" is not well-defined and there's no
>> metric for "most".)
>
> Most languages (including Java) that claim to be “portable” seem to be
> implemented in C. Therefore they can only be ported to platforms where a C
> compiler (or cross-compiler) is already available.
And this, dear reader, is a wonderful example of "Completely Missing the
Point."
--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-05 15:46 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <iseu7e$62r$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4975 |
In message <isck0f$79m$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 12:08 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> In message<isaq5i41eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote:
>>
>>> ("the most portable language in the world" is a
>>> vapid claim, since "portable" is not well-defined and there's no
>>> metric for "most".)
>>
>> Most languages (including Java) that claim to be “portable” seem to be
>> implemented in C. Therefore they can only be ported to platforms where a
>> C compiler (or cross-compiler) is already available.
>
> And this, dear reader, is a wonderful example of "Completely Missing the
> Point."
And this, dear reader, is a wonderful example of something that probably
made sense to him while it was still inside his head, but came out as
complete gibberish.
What did you think the “point” was, if not the portability of languages?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:26 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <2odqu6p5vbq53pelct7s57uvfc8o43h1fk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #4987 |
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 15:46:54 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>In message <isck0f$79m$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>
>> On 06/04/2011 12:08 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> In message<isaq5i41eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote:
>>>
>>>> ("the most portable language in the world" is a
>>>> vapid claim, since "portable" is not well-defined and there's no
>>>> metric for "most".)
>>>
>>> Most languages (including Java) that claim to be “portable” seem to be
>>> implemented in C. Therefore they can only be ported to platforms where a
>>> C compiler (or cross-compiler) is already available.
>>
>> And this, dear reader, is a wonderful example of "Completely Missing the
>> Point."
>
>And this, dear reader, is a wonderful example of something that probably
>made sense to him while it was still inside his head, but came out as
>complete gibberish.
>
>What did you think the “point” was, if not the portability of languages?
Finding one example does not disprove that something is rare.
For example, you can find one Gene Wirchenko. AFAIK, I am the
only one on the planet. One in six billion (or whatever we are up to)
is a rarity.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 10:23 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <isjk1q$sm1$4@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #5030 |
In message <2odqu6p5vbq53pelct7s57uvfc8o43h1fk@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > Finding one example does not disprove that something is rare. I provided several examples—large ones, too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 13:55 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <vu3tu6p5lj7q1q85alge01v2hc1sjst3gn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #5040 |
On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:23:53 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>In message <2odqu6p5vbq53pelct7s57uvfc8o43h1fk@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko
>wrote:
>
>> Finding one example does not disprove that something is rare.
>
>I provided several examples—large ones, too.
Several might not be enough either.
And you might not have to prove <not-rareness> but <in general
use> or <in general use in one or more niches>.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web