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 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 03:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <is54hb$rcg$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #4846 |
On 5/31/2011 10:04 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > On 05/31/2011 11:15 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote: >> Do you have an insight why Java JRE is not shipped with >> the browser itself? > > License issues is the biggest one. There is also the fact that it > defeats the purpose of the plugin architecture: it's not like Firefox > bundles Flash, the other You Need This plugin. > > Actually, as an aside, Firefox used to have a deep integration via OJI, > and until Firefox 3 or so, it was theoretically possible to write your > extension in Java (JavaXPCOM has since been broken, I think). Nowadays, > Mozilla-Java integration is mostly limited to the standard NPAPI (i.e., > plugin) architecture capabilities. > >> The browser size will be a little larger, but so what? internet >> speed is fast these days, who cares if it is 18 MB larger now. > > Judging from wget, the size of Firefox right now is 12 MB. While > download size is not a huge priority, a 150% regression is definitely > not going to be accepted. And keep in mind that not everyone has access > to high-speed internet; e.g., Africa. > and, even in the US, some of us in non-urban areas (IOW, where the county doesn't bother to pave any of the roads) have poor-quality DSL, where an added 18MB could add maybe an extra hour or more to the download time...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 10:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isaq5k51eti@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #4823 |
BGB wrote: > > of course, C# is currently up there as well, so it is mostly a battle > between C, C++, Java, and C# for the title of "most widely used > language...". That's a meaningless title unless you define it. Used by the most programmers? Used by the most "applications" (however that would be defined)? Most SLOC or function points or some other dubious code metric? Ever? In the last year, month, week? TIOBE's rankings are suspect, as is their methodology, but at least they have a method - they're not just pulling a list out of their collective ass. FYI, the most recent short-term TIOBE rankings are Java, C, C++, C#, PHP, Objective-C, Python, "(Visual) Basic" (a dubious entry), Perl, and Ruby, in that order.[1] That's for May 2011. (RPG has risen to #20, by the way, from #25 last year. Time for everyone to refresh those RPG skills!) Their long-term data shows Java and C securely holding the top two spots for the past decade. C++ briefly beat C for the #2 spot a couple of times, but it didn't last. But as I noted, the TIOBE rankings are suspect. They're based on things like advertised positions and classes, so they mostly measure demand or perceived demand in various markets. And simplistic interpretations of their data are likely to be misleading. For example, they rank COBOL at #37, well below, say, Logo (#24). (Time to brush up on those Logo skills!) But there are a few billion lines of COBOL application source code still under maintenance. They're rarely touched (indeed, businesses are tremendously wary of touching them), because they encode business rules. But they still exist and the programs compiled from them are still used. Does that mean COBOL is under-ranked? Only if you interpret the TIOBE rankings to mean something other than what they mean. Similarly, we see TIOBE ranks Alice (a language in the ML family) at #35, and PL/I at #42. Alice is free, and comes with a free IDE. The major PL/I implementations - IBM's and ours - are expensive. But we still sell a goodly number of PL/I licenses, and all evidence suggests IBM does too. We don't see PL/I customers rushing to switch to Alice. Or even, say, C, which is more like PL/I and is the #2 language. [1] http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html -- Michael Wojcik Micro Focus Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 11:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isatrr$ok9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4940 |
On 06/03/2011 10:05 AM, Michael Wojcik wrote: > TIOBE's rankings are suspect, as is their methodology, but at least > they have a method - they're not just pulling a list out of their > collective ass. At the very least, TIOBE explains their method and admits that it may not be the most useful gauge of programming language popularity. They especially admit that rankings below around #25 or so (and probably it ought to be higher) are pretty much complete bullshit. > FYI, the most recent short-term TIOBE rankings are Java, C, C++, C#, > PHP, Objective-C, Python, "(Visual) Basic" (a dubious entry), Perl, > and Ruby, in that order.[1] That's for May 2011. (RPG has risen to > #20, by the way, from #25 last year. Time for everyone to refresh > those RPG skills!) That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other light programming, and you accept that what is being measured is the interest in people with those language skills. Java, C, C++, and C# I don't think anyone would disagree with; Objective-C is basically programming on Mac, PHP and Ruby are the most significant web-programming languages (you might also include ASP, but that seems to be falling out of favor, even by Microsoft). Python and Perl are of course the premier scripting languages, and Visual Basic is the crown of crappy macro stuff and programming for idiots. I had a discussion a few months ago about what a ranking of the languages as measured by most lines of code (normalized to account for expressiveness) in use would be. At the very least, Java, C, Fortran, and COBOL would be near the top of the list; I don't know much more to give a fuller list... -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 17:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isbkvi2me0@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #4941 |
Joshua Cranmer wrote: > > That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably > reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other > light programming, and you accept that what is being measured is the > interest in people with those language skills. Java, C, C++, and C# I > don't think anyone would disagree with; Yes, I'd say those four are probably among the top ten programming languages, in terms of "interest in people with those language skills", as you put it. (And I'd agree that's a fair gloss of what TIOBE think they're measuring.) > Objective-C is basically > programming on Mac And the iOS platforms - the iPhone and iPad. That's a large and vigorous market, though we'll see how long it maintains that degree of interest. > PHP and Ruby are the most significant > web-programming languages (you might also include ASP, but that seems to > be falling out of favor, even by Microsoft). Python and Perl are of > course the premier scripting languages, and Visual Basic is the crown of > crappy macro stuff and programming for idiots. I suspect the TIOBE rankings underestimate ECMAScript (Javascript and other implementations) - or more precisely, that the observable interest in ECMAScript skills is disproportionately low when compared to the amount of ECMAScript being written. But that's partly because many people are still under the impression that it's fine to let any idiot write their ECMAScript scripts. > I had a discussion a few months ago about what a ranking of the > languages as measured by most lines of code (normalized to account for > expressiveness) in use would be. At the very least, Java, C, Fortran, > and COBOL would be near the top of the list; I don't know much more to > give a fuller list... Of course it's difficult to arrive at any sort of consensus over how to normalize for expressiveness, and it could even be argued that such a measure is not as useful as it appears. For example, a tremendous amount of very important code was written in various assembly languages; but since such languages have relatively low expressiveness (even the wildly CISCy ones), and since such programs were often written for resource-constrained environments, that metric would tend to rank assembly languages relatively low, even if they were all grouped into one category. (There are still extant business-logic applications written in assembly, by the way. We encounter them sometimes at customer sites, and in fact demand for our S/390 / zSeries assembly emulation has increased in the past few years.) Fortran (nee FORTRAN) and COBOL can claim a great many normalized lines of source (NSLOCs?) partly because of age, of course; they're the two oldest HLLs still in widespread use. Besides the four you mention, I suspect C++ would place high in the list. Demand for it has gradually diminished somewhat since the '80s because of the proliferation of other capable, widely-available OO languages[1], but it's often used for huge projects like office suites and GUI frameworks, which accumulate features like flies on the substrate of your choice. [1] I wouldn't include the OO predecessors of C++ in this category. SIMULA was never widely available, and Smalltalk has a host of problems, particularly for commercial software development. (Later Smalltalk variants, such as Squeak, solved some of those; but too little, too late.) -- 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 12:14 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <isbte0$dm0$4@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4941 |
In message <isatrr$ok9$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably > reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other > light programming ... But do you count all the versions of VBA as one language? For example, macros written for Microsoft Office 2003 do not so easily port to Office 2007 or later.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 02:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isckef$92j$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4959 |
On 06/03/2011 08:14 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message<isatrr$ok9$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > >> That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably >> reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other >> light programming ... > > But do you count all the versions of VBA as one language? For example, > macros written for Microsoft Office 2003 do not so easily port to Office > 2007 or later. To my knowledge, the *language* hasn't changed, it's the *library* that's changed. -- 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 15:40 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <isetqk$5rd$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4977 |
In message <isckef$92j$2@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> On 06/03/2011 08:14 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> In message<isatrr$ok9$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>>
>>> That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably
>>> reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other
>>> light programming ...
>>
>> But do you count all the versions of VBA as one language? For example,
>> macros written for Microsoft Office 2003 do not so easily port to Office
>> 2007 or later.
>
> To my knowledge, the *language* hasn't changed, it's the *library*
> that's changed.
Bit more than that <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Basic_.NET>:
... once the methods that have been moved around and that can be
automatically converted are accounted for, the basic syntax of the
language has not seen many "breaking" changes, just additions to support
new features like structured exception handling and short-circuited
expressions. Two important data type changes occurred ...
...
The things that have changed significantly are the semantics—from those
of an object-based programming language running on a deterministic,
reference-counted engine based on COM to a fully object-oriented
language backed by the .NET Framework ...
And whether you consider the “library” part of the “language” or not, either
way it’s a real source of compatibility headaches
<http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2010/01/12/office_2007_migration_problems/>.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 12:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isnvt0415kt@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #4959 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <isatrr$ok9$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > >> That those are the top 10 languages in some order is probably >> reasonable, if you include the use of Basic in Office macros and other >> light programming ... > > But do you count all the versions of VBA as one language? For example, > macros written for Microsoft Office 2003 do not so easily port to Office > 2007 or later. It looks like TIOBE lumps all languages with "Basic" in the name into their "(Visual) Basic" category. So that would include VB6, VB.NET, VBAs of every version, presumably VBScript, and even things like Realbasic, as well as any legacy BASICs that might show up in their data. I agree that's a pretty diverse group to consider a single language. While I avoid VB whenever possible, even I've seen enough to know that the move from VB6 to VB.NET included some major changes. (As it would have to; VB6 wasn't exactly a good fit for the CLR.) VB.NET is in many ways closer to C# than it is to historical BASIC. It's trivial to compile VB.NET into MSIL and then decompile it back into C#, or vice versa (if you avoid newer C# features that aren't supported in VB.NET yet). -- Michael Wojcik Micro Focus Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-09 07:55 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <JE1Ip.4$F25.3@newsfe04.iad> |
| In reply to | #5091 |
On 11-06-09 12:38 AM, Stefan Ram wrote: > Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> writes: >> VB.NET is in many ways closer to C# than it is to historical BASIC. >> It's trivial to compile VB.NET into MSIL and then decompile it back >> into C#, or vice versa (if you avoid newer C# features that aren't >> supported in VB.NET yet). > > VB is not called »VB.NET« anymore. That's true, and I guess it hasn't officially ever been VB.NET except for the 2003 version. In the real world, though, a lot of coding still happens in classic VB. I've had to do fairly extensive work the past few years in VB6, work which is not readily possible in VB (.NET). For ease of discussion I'll often refer to VB7 and later as VB.NET, and I'm not alone in this. > When one writes code in VB, then compiles it into IL, one > can't but avoid newer C# features that aren't supported in > VB yet! > > There also are features in VB not supported in C#. > > "Visual Basic is a full-fledged modern object-oriented > language with many unique features, such as static > typing where possible but dynamic typing where > necessary, declarative event handling, deep XML > integration with optional layered XSD types, highly > expressive query comprehension syntax, type inference, > etc. etc. This makes Visual Basic actually more > interesting to researchers and practitioners than the > "popular" static languages such as Java, C# and dynamic > languages such as Ruby or JavaScript." > > Erik Meijer > Those are 2007 comments if I'm not mistaken. I'm using C# 4.0 in a current WPF project, and I'm not sure that there's any of those features that I'm _not_ using right now. Microsoft has very rapid development cycles for its languages (as you know), and while that's sometimes a PITA it's often a bonus. One side-effect of that is that if a given version of VB has something cool, and a given version of C# doesn't, then most of the time the next version of C# will. Recall that C# 4.0 is mostly about dynamic features. OT for CLJP: writing desktop apps in C# 4.0 and WPF (XAML heavy) is yet another eye-opener for me. I'm mostly a Java SE/Java EE guy and so every time I get a chance to do some pro work in C# it's refreshing. Particularly GUI work. To this day if I wanted a GUI in the Java world I'd go with a web app. If there's one thing MS seems to have gotten right forever, and Java has struggled with, it's desktop apps and all the tooling for it. And I hate to say it but ever since I started using C# (with C# 2.0 in my case, I barely scratched the surface of 1.0) it's always struck me as being a jump or two ahead of Java. Most of that I attribute to the dynamicism of the Microsoft language factory, contrasted to the problems of the JSR process. But it's certainly been the case for me that it just seems to be easier to get things done with C# than with Java, version by version. Particularly with desktop apps. This is core language mind you. I think Java EE on the other hand generally has had a definite edge over anything that Microsoft has produced, and Java EE 6 is more of the same. But not necessarily by much - Java web apps got a jump on MS in particular with JSF, but a few years later MS levelled the playing field with ASP.NET MVC, and for a whole spectrum of web apps these days I'd toss a coin to choose between JSF 2.x and ASP.NET MVC 2 or 3. AHS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-12 17:11 -0300 |
| Subject | Re: Swing versus Windows.Forms |
| Message-ID | <149Jp.3939$x11.1762@newsfe09.iad> |
| In reply to | #5156 |
On 11-06-10 01:28 PM, Stefan Ram wrote: > Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> writes: >> OT for CLJP: writing desktop apps in C# 4.0 and WPF (XAML heavy) is yet >> another eye-opener for me. I'm mostly a Java SE/Java EE guy and so every >> time I get a chance to do some pro work in C# it's refreshing. >> Particularly GUI work. > > Last time I looked, the library did not even offered me > lay-out managers, and wanted me to specify the component > geometry in some screen unit. > > I tried to code my way around this and build GUIs without a > hard-coded geometry. > > For example, when I tried to create a form with a button, > an input field and an output field, I had to set its size > /manually/ (what a disgust, just look at the »5«!): > > form.Size = new System.Drawing.Size( button.Size.Width, 5 * input.Size.Height ) > > , and there was no default layout mangager which would do > this for me. But maybe I just did not known the most elegant > way to do this in C#? > You would typically use Grid, DockPanel and/or StackPanel to position controls. These _are_ your layout managers. :-) If you weren't too turned off that time, a good starting point to see what is currently available is http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms746927.aspx Particularly the sections on Resources, Styles & Templates, and the Layout System. AHS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-11 13:43 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Android---Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <it0b3l21q2f@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #5091 |
Stefan Ram wrote: > Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> writes: >> VB.NET is in many ways closer to C# than it is to historical BASIC. >> It's trivial to compile VB.NET into MSIL and then decompile it back >> into C#, or vice versa (if you avoid newer C# features that aren't >> supported in VB.NET yet). > > VB is not called »VB.NET« anymore. It certainly is by many people, regardless of what Microsoft choose to call it. And the term is useful to distinguish it from pre-.NET versions of VB. > When one writes code in VB, then compiles it into IL, one > can't but avoid newer C# features that aren't supported in > VB yet! Obviously my parenthetical applied to "vice versa", which would involve writing code in C#, compiling it, and decompiling into VB. As for Erik Meijer - well, he's welcome to his opinion about what languages are "interesting". -- Michael Wojcik Micro Focus Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-11 14:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android---Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.285d849c71d2c73198978f@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #5213 |
In article <it0b3l21q2f@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik says... > > VB is not called »VB.NET« anymore. > > It certainly is by many people, regardless of what Microsoft choose to > call it. And the term is useful to distinguish it from pre-.NET > versions of VB. I've never called it VB7. I don't call my currently-installed version VB 2010, either. (or VB10, because according to Help|About, it's actually version 10.0.40219.1 Service Pack 1.) I can think of one exceedingly good reason to call VB, from version 7 forward, VB.NET: it allows me to write .NET managed code, which VB6 doesn't. :) -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 13:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isbf0k$b1o$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #4940 |
On 6/3/2011 7:05 AM, Michael Wojcik wrote: > BGB wrote: >> >> of course, C# is currently up there as well, so it is mostly a battle >> between C, C++, Java, and C# for the title of "most widely used >> language...". > > That's a meaningless title unless you define it. Used by the most > programmers? Used by the most "applications" (however that would be > defined)? Most SLOC or function points or some other dubious code > metric? Ever? In the last year, month, week? > > TIOBE's rankings are suspect, as is their methodology, but at least > they have a method - they're not just pulling a list out of their > collective ass. > > FYI, the most recent short-term TIOBE rankings are Java, C, C++, C#, > PHP, Objective-C, Python, "(Visual) Basic" (a dubious entry), Perl, > and Ruby, in that order.[1] That's for May 2011. (RPG has risen to > #20, by the way, from #25 last year. Time for everyone to refresh > those RPG skills!) > > Their long-term data shows Java and C securely holding the top two > spots for the past decade. C++ briefly beat C for the #2 spot a couple > of times, but it didn't last. > > But as I noted, the TIOBE rankings are suspect. They're based on > things like advertised positions and classes, so they mostly measure > demand or perceived demand in various markets. > but, alas, these measures are probably adequate... if I were to ass-pull a list, mostly from most common personally encountered code, it would likely look more like: C C++ Java Perl Python Bash / Shell-Scripts ... > And simplistic interpretations of their data are likely to be > misleading. For example, they rank COBOL at #37, well below, say, Logo > (#24). (Time to brush up on those Logo skills!) But there are a few > billion lines of COBOL application source code still under > maintenance. They're rarely touched (indeed, businesses are > tremendously wary of touching them), because they encode business > rules. But they still exist and the programs compiled from them are > still used. Does that mean COBOL is under-ranked? Only if you > interpret the TIOBE rankings to mean something other than what they mean. > my main interpretation is more like: top of the list means top of the list (getting things to the top of a given list is often regarded as a goal in itself, like the "yay, we're number one, in your face, ..." sense); top of the list also means generally most popular languages; languages near the top are more likely to be more "acceptable" to people than those lower on the list; ... > Similarly, we see TIOBE ranks Alice (a language in the ML family) at > #35, and PL/I at #42. Alice is free, and comes with a free IDE. The > major PL/I implementations - IBM's and ours - are expensive. But we > still sell a goodly number of PL/I licenses, and all evidence suggests > IBM does too. We don't see PL/I customers rushing to switch to Alice. > Or even, say, C, which is more like PL/I and is the #2 language. > actually... I had thought they meant Alice in the sense of the CMU+EA thinggy, which involves drag-and-drop to control 3D characters and was meant as a teaching tool... either way, it would be a surprise if it gained a whole lot of status... even more so if people were actually trying to write serious "software" with these drag-and-drop character-control commands... it could make more sense as a storyboarding/pre-vis tool though... but, yeah, if it is some other real programming language, that makes a little more sense... > > [1] http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 12:13 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <isbtac$dm0$3@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4940 |
In message <isaq5k51eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote: > [TIOBE’s] long-term data shows Java and C securely holding the top two > spots for the past decade. With Java on a downward trend. > But as I noted, the TIOBE rankings are suspect. They're based on > things like advertised positions and classes, so they mostly measure > demand or perceived demand in various markets. Which is a good basis for deciding what skills to brush up on, don’t you think? > And simplistic interpretations of their data are likely to be > misleading. For example, they rank COBOL at #37, well below, say, Logo > (#24). (Time to brush up on those Logo skills!) But there are a few > billion lines of COBOL application source code still under > maintenance. They're rarely touched (indeed, businesses are > tremendously wary of touching them), because they encode business > rules. But they still exist and the programs compiled from them are > still used. Does that mean COBOL is under-ranked? The code exists, but there’s less demand for humans to look at that code. That’s what TIOBE is telling you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-03 21:52 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <JlfGp.1$PA5.0@newsfe01.iad> |
| In reply to | #4958 |
On 11-06-03 09:13 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <isaq5k51eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote: > >> [TIOBE’s] long-term data shows Java and C securely holding the top two >> spots for the past decade. > > With Java on a downward trend. Not at the moment in any serious kind of way. After 2005 or so you'd be hard-pressed to argue that Java has lost its position, and it certainly hasn't over the last 12 months by TIOBE data. Who actually cares where Java was in 2001 or what happened to it in the first 5 years after that? Arguably Java was found in a lot of applications at the time precisely because a lot of other languages sucked pretty hard, but now there are reasonable competitors. Java has now settled into a solid position that it's unlikely to give up for decades. By your own admission you don't play in the enterprise space: I can assure you that in that space Java has a lock. >> But as I noted, the TIOBE rankings are suspect. They're based on >> things like advertised positions and classes, so they mostly measure >> demand or perceived demand in various markets. > > Which is a good basis for deciding what skills to brush up on, don’t you > think? [ SNIP ] I agree. To an extent. The TIOBE rankings don't say anything about application domains. One's ability to program many problems requires comprehensive knowledge of the domain, and many domains (finance, science, engineering etc) have preferred language choices that are markedly different from what the overall TIOBE rankings indicate. If you're going to be simply a general-purpose programmer with no extensive knowledge in specific application domains then you may as well go with TIOBE. But as soon as your education and experience starts to position you in a sector then TIOBE is less relevant. AHS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-04 02:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <isckmn$as7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4958 |
On 06/03/2011 08:13 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message<isaq5k51eti@news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik wrote: > >> [TIOBE’s] long-term data shows Java and C securely holding the top two >> spots for the past decade. > > With Java on a downward trend. > >> But as I noted, the TIOBE rankings are suspect. They're based on >> things like advertised positions and classes, so they mostly measure >> demand or perceived demand in various markets. > > Which is a good basis for deciding what skills to brush up on, don’t you > think? It is partially a metric of what employers are looking for and partially a metric of what people are willing to learn. In that vein, you would expect "trendy" languages--e.g., Ruby--to be overweighted and mature languages--e.g., Java--to be underweighted. Although Java has a confounding factor due to its widespread use as the first programming language. In the end, it probably doesn't matter. If you're a new entrant to the jobs market, you should probably have the flexibility to learn any language desired of you; if you've been in the workforce for decades, then your domain knowledge is what will sell you and not the languages you know. -- 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 15:45 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <iseu43$62r$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4978 |
In message <isckmn$as7$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > In the end, it probably doesn't matter. If you're a new entrant to the > jobs market, you should probably have the flexibility to learn any > language desired of you; if you've been in the workforce for decades, > then your domain knowledge is what will sell you and not the languages > you know. I’ve been in the workforce for decades, and I keep getting challenged to deal with new domains, from (most recently) mobile apps and telephony, and going further back, databases and Web development (both back-end and front- end), multimedia, client-server networking etc. I don’t think specialism in one domain is going to keep you employed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-05 01:04 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <xfDGp.508$_I7.290@newsfe08.iad> |
| In reply to | #4986 |
On 11-06-05 12:45 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <isckmn$as7$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: > >> In the end, it probably doesn't matter. If you're a new entrant to the >> jobs market, you should probably have the flexibility to learn any >> language desired of you; if you've been in the workforce for decades, >> then your domain knowledge is what will sell you and not the languages >> you know. > > I’ve been in the workforce for decades, and I keep getting challenged to > deal with new domains, from (most recently) mobile apps and telephony, and > going further back, databases and Web development (both back-end and front- > end), multimedia, client-server networking etc. > > I don’t think specialism in one domain is going to keep you employed. What you mention are technologies. They are not domains. As I mentioned in my previous post, domains are application domains, like engineering or finance or health or education or aeronautics or games or image recognition. What you do need to do is keep up with the changing technologies. But if you are specialized in an application domain then that will keep you employed. AHS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 18:52 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <ishteh$t08$3@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4988 |
In message <xfDGp.508$_I7.290@newsfe08.iad>, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > On 11-06-05 12:45 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> In message <isckmn$as7$1@dont-email.me>, Joshua Cranmer wrote: >> >>> In the end, it probably doesn't matter. If you're a new entrant to the >>> jobs market, you should probably have the flexibility to learn any >>> language desired of you; if you've been in the workforce for decades, >>> then your domain knowledge is what will sell you and not the languages >>> you know. >> >> I’ve been in the workforce for decades, and I keep getting challenged to >> deal with new domains, from (most recently) mobile apps and telephony, >> and going further back, databases and Web development (both back-end and >> front- end), multimedia, client-server networking etc. >> >> I don’t think specialism in one domain is going to keep you employed. > > What you mention are technologies. They are not domains. As I mentioned > in my previous post, domains are application domains, like engineering > or finance or health or education or aeronautics or games or image > recognition. No, what you mention are themselves just technologies, not domains. Engineering is just a collection of technologies; finance is technology (insofar as it is mathematically-based); health is nothing without technology these days; same with education, aeronautics, etc, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 01:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isi3g3$161$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #5003 |
On 6/5/2011 11:52 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > No, what you mention are themselves just technologies, not domains. > Engineering is just a collection of technologies; I think engineering is more than just technology. You have to understand things, like stress and strain, dynamics and control, how to solve differential and integral equations, and many other hard subjects. It takes many long years to understand some of these things. Not everything in the world is a pointy and clicky technology thing, sometimes, one has to do some pure thinking to solve an engineering problem. Even if one uses advanced computers, one still needs to undertand what they are doing, else the bridge might fall. --Nasser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web