Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.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 18:17:29 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 154 Message-ID: References: <55219dfc$0$280$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <5521a43d$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <5521a992$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <5521ae92$0$285$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 22:16:38 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e5dfcaf843262377062d568c34777fa3"; logging-data="19016"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18hS6RDmYyGf9SNb/Md7pP2RaaNa4b/WiU=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 In-Reply-To: <5521ae92$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Cancel-Lock: sha1:YX1djAVyK3czB9P3rbAB0j86IBk= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:31482 On 4/5/2015 5:52 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 4/5/2015 5:42 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> On 4/5/2015 5:30 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 4/5/2015 5:17 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>> 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. >>> >>> So how does the the fact that JavaScript comes from the browser vendor >>> while the Java plugin comes from Oracle impact the Stefan's conclusion >>> about support for RWD and what it means for Java? > > I can understand that you don't want to try to explain that. > I can understand why you don't see what is a major difference. >>>>>>> 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. >>> >>> Did you read the question? >>> >> >> Yes, I read the question. Did YOU? Or, more importantly - are you >> capable of UNDERSTANDING the claims? It doesn't look like it. > > Question: 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?? > > Answer: Yes they are. > > The question was about what you would do. So an answer to the question > would either be that you would do it or that you you would not do it. > The question was not whether it was two different languages. > Which is what I answered. I tried to make it so simple even YOU could understand that - but I see I failed there, also. >>>>>>>>>> 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?? >>>> >>>> When you split hairs to contradict a bigger point. It's a mark of a >>>> pedantic troll. >>> >>> You started a completely irrelevant sub-thread. And it is splitting >>> hairs to point out that besides irrelevant then it was also wrong. >>> >>> :-) >> >> Nope, it was completely relevant to the subject at hand. But you don't >> understand that. >> >> But then another indicator of a pedantic troll is selectively snipping >> information which contradicts what her has to say. Like you did (again) >> here. > > I believe I only snipped signature and your remarks about another group > which I don't think provide any substance in this discussion. > > Arne > > You snipped more than that. But then I wouldn't expect you to admit to it. And mentioning that you are known as a pedantic troll in at least one other newsgroup is definitely pertinent to any discussion where you are acting in a similar manner. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================