Could I use Java or c#? [was: Re: re-writing college books]

[michaelslists at gmail.com (mikeiscool)]

On 11/14/06, ljknews <ljknews at mac.com> wrote:
> At 10:31 PM +1100 11/13/06, mikeiscool wrote:
> > On 11/13/06, Glenn and Mary Everhart <everhart at gce.com> wrote:
>
> > > If there is some construct that NEEDS to be interpreted to gain something, it
> > > can be justified on that basis. Using interpretive runtimes just to link
> > > languages, or just to achieve portability when source code portability runs
> > > pretty well thanks, seems wasteful to me.
> >
> > You think source code portability is good enough such that runtime
> > portability isn't really needed?
>
> Anything beyond source code portability tempts the customer into use on
> a platform where the developer has not tested.

But it has been tested, because if it runs on that jvm it has been
tested for that JVM. a JVM version x on linux is the same as a JVM
version x on windows. That's the point. Now maybe they try running it
with a version x - 5 JVM, well fine, it may not work, but the response
would be: "duh".


> --
> Larry Kilgallen

-- mic