On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:40:00PM +0200, Platonides wrote:
Jay R. Ashworth:
Because the problem is *not* "shouldn't
some things which are now
written in Java be written in JS, etc, instead?", it's "There are
indisputably useful things which can *only* be written in Java for the
deployment environment being discussed", and he didn't solve that worth
a damn, alas.
I wasn't trying to prove it. It should be addressed by Andreas, who
wants them. I pointed the example didn't need Java at all, but Rob
opined it was a trivial implementation (Andreas probably disagreed).
I agree it doesn't probe, but i'm not pushing for java :-) They do
exist, can some of them be needed on a wmf project? Don't know. Show
me one to decide ;-) Or maybe it could be done in both but it's coded
200% faster in java, who knows...
I understand that you were not trying to prove Java was necessary --
indeed, that you *were* trying to prove that Java is rarely necessary
(or something close to that).
My point was merely that in the current context (figuring out how to
*provide* Java support), the only meta-argument that's useful on the
topic of "necessity" is "it's provably never necessary". Since
you
can't make that argument with a straight face -- clearly, there will be
some things that Java can do that JS can't -- then arguments on that
axis aren't useful to "how can we do it"... which was the question at
hand.
Therefore, such arguments merely clutter the discussion space.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA
http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
The Internet: We paved paradise, and put up a snarking lot.