Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jerry Stuckle Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Return of the Applets? Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2015 17:17:29 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 98 Message-ID: References: <55219dfc$0$280$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <5521a43d$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2015 21:16:37 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e5dfcaf843262377062d568c34777fa3"; logging-data="3441"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+q4FLiRf60qbaMiNgB1ANqk+JaNBPUj6Q=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 In-Reply-To: <5521a43d$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Cancel-Lock: sha1:RW3v38+Khja02pKIlg+xG372XGw= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:31477 On 4/5/2015 5:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 4/5/2015 4:54 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> On 4/5/2015 4:41 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 4/5/2015 3:14 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>> On 4/5/2015 1:31 PM, Stefan Ram wrote: >>>>> Jerry Stuckle writes: >>>>>> You're mixing apples and oranges. Java is NOT JavaScript - or vice >>>>>> versa. They are two different languages with two different purposes. >>>>> >>>>> That must be some kind of reflex some people can't control! >>>>> >>>>> But no one has claimed that Java was JavaScript. Relax. >>>> >>>> No, but you are comparing them - which is like comparing apples and >>>> oranges. >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> They were compared as languages for running code in browser. >>> >>> A perfectly valid comparison. >>> >> >> But Java does not "run in the browser". It runs in an extension, loaded >> by the browser. >> >> As opposed to JavaScript - which runs natively in most browsers. >> >> A very important distinction. > > A relevant distinction in some contexts. > > But not relevant in this context. > > The discussion was about access to screen and the ability to support RWS. > 100% relevant in this conversation - but since it contradicts your argument, you have to claim it's unimportant. > >>> Just like comparing apples and oranges is a perfectly valid comparsion >>> when discussing what fruits you think taste the best. >>> >>> None of which explains why you brought the Java != JavaScript discussion >>> into the picture. >> >> It does when you're comparing two entirely different languages with >> different goals and different implementations. > > So if someone is comparing C++ and objective-C in a specific context > then you also want to point out that it is two different languages?? > > I would not. > > Neither for those two or for Java and JavaScript. > Yes they are. However, they are much closer to each other than Java and JavaScript are. At least the two have the same goals, while Java and JavaScript do not. >>>>>> The ONLY thing they have in common are the letters "J", "v" and two >>>>>> "a"s. >>>>> >>>>> But since you insist, let me give you some factual information. >>>>> >>>>> - Both are trademarks of Oracle. >>>> >>>> So? >>> >>> It proves that your claim: >>> >>> #The ONLY thing they have in common are the letters "J", "v" and two >>> "a"s. >>> >>> is wrong. >> >> So I guess you're just being a pedantic troll than, Arne. > > Since when has it been considered trolling to point out that > claims made are flat out wrong?? > > Arne > When you split hairs to contradict a bigger point. It's a mark of a pedantic troll. But as I said (and you snipped), you've done this before in at least one other newsgroup. No surprises here. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================