Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : BORL: Time to BUY! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David R who wrote (9388)	3/10/1998 8:59:00 PM
From: shane forbes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

David: Pointers in VJava 98 means the language is definitely not Java IMO. That's so alien to me it's hilarious! Java was built to keep those pointers away from the developer - no more memory leaks, no more dangling pointers. Leaving pointers out means the developer can't fool around with the memory of the system the program is executing on. This is there for security reasons as well. Now MSFT has changed the rules completely breaking one of the key tenets of the language and they still call it Java! Funny. However to give credit where credit is there though Java is elegant language features must "also be affordable in the context of a real program" (Stroustrup's book). This is what C++ balances throughout and Java does not. C++ retains the strong systems programming heritage, Java was not built to be a substitiute for Assembly (like C was). As usual the trick is to use the right language for the right task. I like Java not because it is elegant but it also speeds up development time considerably. Part of the reason is that one does not have to deal with pointers. Now VJava 98 has introduced them (limited I think) and we are back to square 2. Probably nec. for speed. But then this makes VJava 98 a very different type of beast from Java and likely a very different beast from C++ as well. It will likely find a home but I still think MSFT's audacity will (I hope) have some sort of backlash, even if it turns out to be just short term. Shane.