The myth of partability and reusability (Re: thoughts about Tunes OTOP & JavaVM)

[Laurent Martelli]

>>>>> "Thomas" == Mahler Thomas <thomas.mahler@karstadt.de> writes:

  Thomas> Hello Basile,

  Thomas> Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:

  >> * I have very few experience with Java and the JVM. (but I read
  >> the 3 Java+JavaSpec+JVMspec books) I do know that it is not as
  >> portable as Sun claim it is. I don't know in practice how is Java
  >> nonportable (is it limited to system [eg filenames] & GUI
  >> issues?)

  Thomas> AFAIK Java IS portable as long as you only use JDK
  Thomas> liraries. Problems arise when you have to use third party
  Thomas> libraries and components (perhaps worst example: Microsoft
  Thomas> AFC which provides some kind of mapping of MFC to Java which
  Thomas> is of course only compatible to Windows...)

Yes, Just like any language. I don't think that any language is
significantly more portable or helps reuse code more than others. It
is the code (libraries, programs) than is portable/reusable or not. 

The main cause of non-portability of C is not C itself, but Unices and
their libraries. 

-- 
Laurent Martelli
martelli@iie.cnam.fr