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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36589 > unrolled thread

Javascript replacing Java?

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

Contents

  Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 07:24 -0700
    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-03 10:51 -0400
      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-04 05:52 +0800
        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-03 23:14 -0400
          Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-05 14:44 -0700
            Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-05 22:28 -0400
              Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-06 13:25 +0000
                Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 05:14 -0700
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-08 17:58 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 13:12 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-08 22:23 +0000
              Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 13:41 -0700
                Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-14 20:30 -0400
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-15 11:55 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 10:46 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-15 19:49 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-15 19:08 -0400
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-16 10:43 +0000
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-16 19:14 -0400
                          Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-17 00:13 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 04:58 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-16 12:23 +0000
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-05-16 10:46 -0400
                          Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-16 19:17 -0400
                            Re: Javascript replacing Java? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2017-05-22 18:17 -0700
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 07:51 -0700
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 10:44 -0700
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2017-05-15 15:07 -0500
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:30 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#36589 — Javascript replacing Java?

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2017/02/28/cs-department-updates-introductory-courses

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36590

On 5/3/2017 10:24 AM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> http://www.stanforddaily.com/2017/02/28/cs-department-updates-introductory-courses

Given how widely used JavaScript is then it is not surprising that
it will be used at some universities. It would be more surprising if it
was not.

But I don't see Java being replaced everywhere. Students should
learn a number of languages. And I am very confident that the
demand for a static typed compiled OO language will remain. And
Java is still one obvious choice for that (most viable alternative
is probably C#). And then there is the need for different
types of languages.

So I don't see JavaScript replacing Java. I expect the future
just like the past to be polyglot.

Java, JavaScript, C#, Python, OCAML*, Haskell*, Scala, C, Rust etc..

(* : academics !!)

Arne

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

#36591

On 03-May-17 10:51 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> But I don't see Java being replaced everywhere. Students should
> learn a number of languages. And I am very confident that the
> demand for a static typed compiled OO language will remain. And
> Java is still one obvious choice for that (most viable alternative
> is probably C#). And then there is the need for different
> types of languages.
>

Are you up to date with ES6?

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

#36592

On 5/3/2017 5:52 PM, Richard Maher wrote:
> On 03-May-17 10:51 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> But I don't see Java being replaced everywhere. Students should
>> learn a number of languages. And I am very confident that the
>> demand for a static typed compiled OO language will remain. And
>> Java is still one obvious choice for that (most viable alternative
>> is probably C#). And then there is the need for different
>> types of languages.
>
> Are you up to date with ES6?

I am not a JS person, but I do read about things.

I think ES6 is a great improvement for JS.

But I do not see it as making JS like Java or C#.

Arne

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

#36593

On Thursday, 4 May 2017 04:15:09 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:

> But I do not see it as making JS like Java or C#.

If you don't know JS, how can you say that?

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

#36594

On 5/5/2017 5:44 PM, a.laforgia@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 May 2017 04:15:09 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:
>> But I do not see it as making JS like Java or C#.
>
> If you don't know JS, how can you say that?

I don't code much in JS, but I still know about JS.

JS and Java are even with ES6 very different languages.

They are typical used for different purposes.

And developers using them have rather different
ways to solve problems.

Too different.

Java and C# are much closer. In language, usage
and developer style.

Arne

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

#36595

On Fri, 05 May 2017 22:28:02 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> Java and C# are much closer. In language, usage and developer style.
>
If you're going to teach several languages, surely you want them to be 
different to prevent the students getting locked into a single rut.

I think Java should be included as a widely used OO language. Its big 
advantage over C++ (apart from cleaner syntax) is that all too much of 
the C++ I've seen was just C with with // comments and using cin and cout 
for i/o. The same objection I have to C++ also goes for Python

I'd teach either C or Pascal as a pure procedural language because both 
are fairly small languages with relatively clean syntax, but with a 
preference for C because its useful outside academia.

There are other languages that a student should know well enough to write 
small programs in, if only to teach them the other approaches exist:

- bash (a good example of shell scripting)

- an assembler (ARM would be better than X86 because addressing 
  is more orthogonal)

- awk (an good example of a report generator and text file handler)

- FORTH or PHP (just to mess with their minds a bit)
  

-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36596

On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:28:32 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> I'd teach either C or Pascal as a pure procedural language because both 
> are fairly small languages with relatively clean syntax, but with a 
> preference for C because its useful outside academia.

My college was mostly COBOL, with introductory courses in C++, CICS, DB2, JCL, RPGIII, but I graduated in 1996.
I would expect college today for a CIS major to teach Java, Javascript, PHP, Powershell, SQL, HTML5, CSS, what else is popular?  Maybe some C# or Ruby, or mobile app language?

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

#36597

On Mon, 08 May 2017 05:14:41 -0700, Eric Douglas wrote:

> On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:28:32 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> I'd teach either C or Pascal as a pure procedural language because both
>> are fairly small languages with relatively clean syntax, but with a
>> preference for C because its useful outside academia.
> 
> My college was mostly COBOL, with introductory courses in C++, CICS,
> DB2, JCL, RPGIII, but I graduated in 1996.
> I would expect college today for a CIS major to teach Java, Javascript,
> PHP, Powershell, SQL, HTML5, CSS, what else is popular?  Maybe some C#
> or Ruby, or mobile app language?

My first languages, in order, were:
Algol 60, PLAN (ICL 1900 macro assembler) and COBOL.

I don't think that SQL can be meaningfully taught as a stand-alone 
language. Rather, it should be taught as part of a RDBMS module which 
would also include data modelling and normalisation, Entity-relationship 
diagramming, SQL, ODBC and JDBC programming. I'd use PostgreSQL as the 
course DBMS because its SQL dialect has fewer non-standard features that 
its rivals and its a FOSS database.
 
I would not include HTML/CSS because thats a markup language rather than 
a programming language. Anybody who needs to learn it can do so by buying 
a copy of Elizabeth Castro's "HTML for the World Wide Web" and working 
through it.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36598

On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 2:02:06 PM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> My first languages, in order, were:
> Algol 60, PLAN (ICL 1900 macro assembler) and COBOL.
> 
My first language was BASIC, in 8th grade on TRS-80s.  My first college course was COBOL (what most businesses used before Java was invented).
My brother learned C, Fortran, Pascal, assembler, so I can only guess those are more used in AI.

> I don't think that SQL can be meaningfully taught as a stand-alone 
> language. Rather, it should be taught as part of a RDBMS module which 
> would also include data modelling and normalisation, Entity-relationship 
> diagramming, SQL, ODBC and JDBC programming. I'd use PostgreSQL as the 
> course DBMS because its SQL dialect has fewer non-standard features that 
> its rivals and its a FOSS database.
>  
I would think data modeling and normalization can be an entire course, and should probably be a prerequisite to SQL.  SQL can easily be it's own course covering transaction commit/rollback, functions, optimization, and joins and unions.

> I would not include HTML/CSS because thats a markup language rather than 
> a programming language. Anybody who needs to learn it can do so by buying 
> a copy of Elizabeth Castro's "HTML for the World Wide Web" and working 
> through it.

HTML and CSS started as a markup language, just universal tags to make text and pictures look pretty.  Our current project sounds more like programming, writing a web page that looks good on a desktop and on any mobile device that has a push button that can open a file browser on the desktop or activate the camera on a mobile device... this course should probably be a prerequisite to the Javascript course and surely to the PHP course.

So far I've personally done very little in any of those web languages but from what I've seen in the help wanted ads they're a must have these days.  I've been with the same small business 17 years.  We started with a custom language using BASIC syntax which is now a hybrid language which runs on Java, and we dabbled in C#.  All our software runs on the local domain.  We have a separate developer for the web site stuff.

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

#36599

On Mon, 08 May 2017 13:12:43 -0700, Eric Douglas wrote:

> On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 2:02:06 PM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> My first languages, in order, were:
>> Algol 60, PLAN (ICL 1900 macro assembler) and COBOL.
>> 
> My first language was BASIC, in 8th grade on TRS-80s.  My first college
> course was COBOL (what most businesses used before Java was invented).
> My brother learned C, Fortran, Pascal, assembler, so I can only guess
> those are more used in AI.
>
I was talking 1966/67 when the only student-accessable computer at my uni 
was an Elliott 503 scientific machine that only spoke Algol 60 and its 
own, fairly nasty, assembler. Admin had an IBM 1401 but us oiks never 
even saw it.

After uni I joined ICL and learned PLAN, and then COBOL about two years 
later. 
 
>> I don't think that SQL can be meaningfully taught as a stand-alone
>> language. Rather, it should be taught as part of a RDBMS module which
>> would also include data modelling and normalisation,
>> Entity-relationship diagramming, SQL, ODBC and JDBC programming. I'd
>> use PostgreSQL as the course DBMS because its SQL dialect has fewer
>> non-standard features that its rivals and its a FOSS database.
>>  
> I would think data modeling and normalization can be an entire course,
> and should probably be a prerequisite to SQL.  SQL can easily be it's
> own course covering transaction commit/rollback, functions,
> optimization, and joins and unions.
> 
Yes, agreed. I don't see a lot of point in teaching SQL to anybody who 
doesn't have a decent grounding in data modelling, a reasonable grasp of 
what a relational database can do and some idea of tuning it. I've seen 
far too much horrid, inefficient and plain unsafe SQL written by people 
who plainly didn't understand how an RDBMS works. Oddly enough, a lot of 
it was written by self-taught Access 'programmers'.
 
> HTML and CSS started as a markup language, just universal tags to make
> text and pictures look pretty.  Our current project sounds more like
> programming, writing a web page that looks good on a desktop and on any
> mobile device that has a push button that can open a file browser on the
> desktop or activate the camera on a mobile device... this course should
> probably be a prerequisite to the Javascript course and surely to the
> PHP course.
>
Yes, pretty much agree. Writing PHP can be proper programming, especially 
if its generating whole pages, but OTOH is becomes quite trivial if its 
just small inserts in what's basically an HTML page.

I looked at Javascript, decided I don't like it, and don't/won't use it 
now: Instead I'll write more complex PHP if I need to, or just use Java 
with Swing and JDBC as needed.


I used to write quite a bit of BASIC when it was about the only language 
a microcomputer could speak apart from assembler. However, as soon as I 
could, I moved on to assembler, PL/9 and C via COBOL - yep, at one point 
I had a COBOL compiler that ran well, if a little slowly, on a 2 MHz 6809-
based box with 48KB RAM and 5.25" floppies.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36600

On Saturday, 6 May 2017 03:28:18 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:

[...]
> They are typical used for different purposes.

Clearly, you've never used NodeJS. JavaScript and Java might be very different but that does not mean anything. They are two general-purpose languages, and you can resolve the same problems with them.

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

#36620

On 5/9/2017 4:41 PM, a.laforgia@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, 6 May 2017 03:28:18 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:
> [...]
>> They are typical used for different purposes.
>
> Clearly, you've never used NodeJS.

I don't.

But I must admit that I find it very difficult to see the relation
between:
1) whether one has used node.js
2) whether one is aware that the percentage of different usages (web
    client side, web server side, smartphone app, desktop app,
    non-web server side, batch oriented) are very different
    in Java and JavaScript

>                                    JavaScript and Java might be very
> different but that does not mean anything. They are two
> general-purpose languages, and you can resolve the same problems with
> them.

The implicit assumption you are making that because a language can do
a task, then it is as good as any other language for the task is
fundamental flawed.

Different languages are have different strong sides and weak side. As
a consequence different tasks suggest different languages. In which
case it makes sense to train students in multiple languages that are
significant different.

Arne

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

#36622

On Sun, 14 May 2017 20:30:54 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> On 5/9/2017 4:41 PM, a.laforgia@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, 6 May 2017 03:28:18 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:
>> [...]
>>> They are typical used for different purposes.
>>
>> Clearly, you've never used NodeJS.
> 
> I don't.
> 
> But I must admit that I find it very difficult to see the relation
> between:
> 1) whether one has used node.js 2) whether one is aware that the
> percentage of different usages (web
>     client side, web server side, smartphone app, desktop app,
>     non-web server side, batch oriented) are very different in Java and
>     JavaScript
> 
>>                                    JavaScript and Java might be very
>> different but that does not mean anything. They are two general-purpose
>> languages, and you can resolve the same problems with them.
> 
> The implicit assumption you are making that because a language can do a
> task, then it is as good as any other language for the task is
> fundamental flawed.
> 
> Different languages are have different strong sides and weak side. As a
> consequence different tasks suggest different languages. In which case
> it makes sense to train students in multiple languages that are
> significant different.
>
Agreed. 

I had a brief tussle with JavaScript and gave up on it because:

1) I like strongly typed languages because I appreciate the compile-time 
error checking that these languages support. At the time I tried it, 
JavaScript seemed to have a policy of leaving all error detection until 
the flawed statement was actually executed. Of course, this has major 
implications for unit test coverage, but somehow I doubt that this is 
widely understood.

Even awk, a traditional UNIX scripting language with a compile-and-go 
style of runtime interpreter has always been much better at error 
detection than JavaScript was in my experience.

2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to 
find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript. The O'Reilly book I 
eventually ended up with was one of their worst, little more than a 
recipe book for JavaScript fragments. It had no satisfactory description 
of the language constructs and syntax. Even comp.lang.javascript was 
unable to suggest a good book.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36624

On Monday, 15 May 2017 12:58:42 UTC+1, Martin Gregorie  wrote:

[...]
> I had a brief tussle with JavaScript and gave up on it because:

So you're yet another one who cannot compare them.

> 1) I like strongly typed languages 
[...]
> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to 
> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript.

Oh, I see, two more than valid reasons to say that JS will never replace Java.

Please note that I am not defending that point. I am just pinpointing that you cannot compare two parties if you haven't got enough information about one of them, and you as well as Arne don't.

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

#36625

On Mon, 15 May 2017 10:46:39 -0700, a.laforgia wrote:

> On Monday, 15 May 2017 12:58:42 UTC+1, Martin Gregorie  wrote:
> 
> [...]
>> I had a brief tussle with JavaScript and gave up on it because:
> 
> So you're yet another one who cannot compare them.
> 
>> 1) I like strongly typed languages
> [...]
>> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to
>> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript.
> 
> Oh, I see, two more than valid reasons to say that JS will never replace
> Java.
> 
> Please note that I am not defending that point. I am just pinpointing
> that you cannot compare two parties if you haven't got enough
> information about one of them, and you as well as Arne don't.

I said nothing about whether one language will replace another.
What I did was to tell you that I don't like JavaScript as a language, 
give my reasons for not liking it and adding that I don't want to use 
it.  

So, don't try put words in my mouth that I didn't say or mean. 


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36628

On 5/15/2017 7:55 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> I had a brief tussle with JavaScript and gave up on it because:
>
> 1) I like strongly typed languages because I appreciate the compile-time
> error checking that these languages support.

I like strongly typed language also (in fact I like those
even more strongly typed than Java).

But different contexts require different solutions. I don't
think it makes sense to require strong typing in all contexts.

In fact I am pretty sure that your favorite shell script
language is not strong typed.

If you want JavaScript with strong typing then use TypeScript,
then you can have strong typing (I believe there is a command
line option to disable implicit any) and it gets transpiled
to regular JavaScript.

>                                                 At the time I tried it,
> JavaScript seemed to have a policy of leaving all error detection until
> the flawed statement was actually executed. Of course, this has major
> implications for unit test coverage, but somehow I doubt that this is
> widely understood.
>
> Even awk, a traditional UNIX scripting language with a compile-and-go
> style of runtime interpreter has always been much better at error
> detection than JavaScript was in my experience.

I am not a JS guy so I can not offer any advice here.

> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to
> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript. The O'Reilly book I
> eventually ended up with was one of their worst, little more than a
> recipe book for JavaScript fragments. It had no satisfactory description
> of the language constructs and syntax. Even comp.lang.javascript was
> unable to suggest a good book.

Given that JavaScript is one of the worlds most widely used
languages, then I would have expected there to be some good
books.

I would definitely look for totally new books. Old books or
revisions of old books will probably focus on 00's client
side JavaScript code.

But again I am not qualified to suggest a specific
book.

Arne

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

#36630

On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:08:49 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> In fact I am pretty sure that your favorite shell script language is not
> strong typed.
>
Thats a fair point, but when you look a bit closer, you soon see that it 
is really only using String variables. Sure, some (process exit codes) 
are ints but nobody dies anything but comparisons with them so there 
would be little difference if they were actually strings.

Yes, you can do arithmetic in a shell script, but to do that you need to 
use the expr utility, which is written in C, to evaluate even simple 
arithmetic or logical expressions and more complex string operations.
 
> But again I am not qualified to suggest a specific book.
>
Not a problem: I can do everything I need to HTML pages by using only 
built-in Apache facilities, e.g. password-protected pages. 

If I need dynamically generated pages PHP does it very nicely. My heavy 
lifting (autogeneration/regeneration of thumbnails for photo albums) is a 
Java application run as a cron job. Both these have been running for some 
years.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#36636

On 5/16/2017 6:43 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:08:49 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> In fact I am pretty sure that your favorite shell script language is not
>> strong typed.
>>
> Thats a fair point, but when you look a bit closer, you soon see that it
> is really only using String variables. Sure, some (process exit codes)
> are ints but nobody dies anything but comparisons with them so there
> would be little difference if they were actually strings.
>
> Yes, you can do arithmetic in a shell script, but to do that you need to
> use the expr utility, which is written in C, to evaluate even simple
> arithmetic or logical expressions and more complex string operations.

That used to be the case. But I believe that they have added
arithmetic capabilities.

Arne

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

#36638

On Tue, 16 May 2017 19:14:56 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> On 5/16/2017 6:43 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:08:49 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> In fact I am pretty sure that your favorite shell script language is
>>> not strong typed.
>>>
>> Thats a fair point, but when you look a bit closer, you soon see that
>> it is really only using String variables. Sure, some (process exit
>> codes) are ints but nobody dies anything but comparisons with them so
>> there would be little difference if they were actually strings.
>>
>> Yes, you can do arithmetic in a shell script, but to do that you need
>> to use the expr utility, which is written in C, to evaluate even simple
>> arithmetic or logical expressions and more complex string operations.
> 
> That used to be the case. But I believe that they have added arithmetic
> capabilities.
> 
[ runs "man bash" ] 

.. so I see. I thought that only csh did this.
It looks quite a bit better/more comprehensive than expr
I also see that bash has swiped Perl's =~ operator and now understands 
POSIX regexes as well
 
Thanks for the heads-up. I should reread manpages a bit more often

BTW, in the dim, dark past I've also used strongly typed command 
languages: ICL's 2900 command language was both typed and block 
structured: the best thumbnail description I can give is that it was 
effectively Algol 68 with i/o and type declarations removed and panoramic 
conditionals added. It could be run line by line as you typed it in or 
written as a text file and compiled. Yes, you did declare types variables 
before using them.

IBM's OS/400 did more or less the same though it wasn't quite so powerful.

The similarity shouldn't be surprising because both OSen were designed in 
the late 60s/early 70s and both were for new mainframe architectures. 
ICL's 2900 series replaced the 1900 series while IBM's Future Series was 
meant to replace the 360/370 range but got cancelled and then resurrected 
over a decade later as the AS/400 range, now known as iSeries.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web