Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #21657 > unrolled thread

Java cousins

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Java cousins bob smith <bob@coolfone.comze.com> - 2013-01-24 11:01 -0800
    Re: Java cousins Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-24 14:18 -0500
      Re: Java cousins Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-24 14:25 -0500
    Re: Java cousins Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-01-25 10:26 +0100
      Re: Java cousins BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-25 12:22 -0600
        Re: Java cousins Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-26 02:49 -0800
          Re: Java cousins BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-26 22:29 -0600

#21657 — Java cousins

I was just wondering what other technologies besides Java are affected by the Oracle/Sun issue.  I think JavaScript is somewhat affected, but I don't fully understand that.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#21658

On 1/24/2013 2:01 PM, bob smith wrote:
> I was just wondering what other technologies besides Java are affected by the Oracle/Sun issue.  I think JavaScript is somewhat affected, but I don't fully understand that.

What issue?

The security problem impacted Java 7 u 0-10. It is fixed in u 11. And it
did not impact Java 6.

I believe it was all platforms.

It has absolutely nothing to do with JavaScript.

Whether Java implementations from other vendors (OpenJDK, IBM, HP etc.)
has the problem would need to be checked with them.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21660

On 1/24/2013 2:18 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 1/24/2013 2:01 PM, bob smith wrote:
>> I was just wondering what other technologies besides Java are affected
>> by the Oracle/Sun issue.  I think JavaScript is somewhat affected, but
>> I don't fully understand that.
>
> What issue?
>
> The security problem impacted Java 7 u 0-10. It is fixed in u 11. And it
> did not impact Java 6.
>
> I believe it was all platforms.
>
> It has absolutely nothing to do with JavaScript.
>
> Whether Java implementations from other vendors (OpenJDK, IBM, HP etc.)
> has the problem would need to be checked with them.

And in some ways I think there has been an overreaction on that
security issue.

Security issues are bad. And they should not be there.

But they are. I can practical guarantee that there
will be found several more security issues for the rest
of 2013.

There has for all previous years.

Java, Flash, Acrobat Reader, SilverLight, JavaScript etc.
has all been hit at various times.

But everybody switching to Lynx is not really a viable option.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21702

On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:01:25 -0800 (PST), bob smith wrote:

> I was just wondering what other technologies besides Java are affected by the Oracle/Sun issue.  I think JavaScript is somewhat affected, but I don't fully understand that.

Java and JavaScript are really in no way related. The confusingly similar
naming is the only thing they have in common, other than that, they are
about as related as Java is to the similarly named coffee.

Liebe Gruesse,
		Joerg

-- 
Ich lese meine Emails nicht, replies to Email bleiben also leider
ungelesen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21711

On 1/25/2013 3:26 AM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:01:25 -0800 (PST), bob smith wrote:
>
>> I was just wondering what other technologies besides Java are affected by the Oracle/Sun issue.  I think JavaScript is somewhat affected, but I don't fully understand that.
>
> Java and JavaScript are really in no way related. The confusingly similar
> naming is the only thing they have in common, other than that, they are
> about as related as Java is to the similarly named coffee.
>

naming is fun isn't it...


but, oddly, no one seems to really be rapidly jumping over to the 
ECMAScript name...

but, not many people are comfortable with the Java trademark either.

so, we end up with a lot of <InsertNameHere>Script (or "WhateverScript") 
languages...
admittedly, my language is included in this category as well.

it sort of works partly as ECMAScript sort of has fuzzy borders, so more 
or less anything with a similar syntax and similar features will fit.

can you type: "var obj={x: 3, y: 4};" and "function foo(x) { ... }" and 
similar? good enough...


unlike many other languages, there is no limit on how many syntax 
features or keywords can be added, and a person can also usually get by 
leaving things out as well, so the borders between ECMAScript and 
WhateverScript are much less clearly defined than, say, between C and 
Java, ...

(and, one can tempt the waters, by say, using less absurd semantics for 
'==', ...).


but, ironically, JavaScript remains more distinctive at least as far as 
it is "the language that runs in web-browsers and is directly embedded 
into HTML documents", and generally bounded by "you can't vary things 
too much, or people wont use a browser where most websites don't work, 
or a site where most browsers don't work", which is a property generally 
absent from many other WhateverScript variants (since there may be 
little or no direct need to share code with other implementations).

but, with the drawback that many people are so often prone to confuse 
JavaScript and Java.


or such...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21730

On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:22:25 -0600, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote,
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>
>but, oddly, no one seems to really be rapidly jumping over to the 
>ECMAScript name...
it sounds too much like enemascript.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time.
The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development 
time. 
~ Tom Cargill  Ninety-ninety Law 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21786

On 1/26/2013 4:49 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:22:25 -0600, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>
>> but, oddly, no one seems to really be rapidly jumping over to the
>> ECMAScript name...
> it sounds too much like enemascript.
>

some people compared it to EczemaScript, which generally isn't very good 
either.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web