TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To: "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 10:52:14 +1000
Reply-To: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (27 lines)
At 11:19 PM +1000 10/6/99, W. Wesley Groleau x4923 wrote:
>> Except that Microsoft seems determined to make its Java Virtual Machine
>> incompatible with Sun's...
>4. Make sure their stuff won't work with ours.  Then make sure the world
>   knows that they are non-standard.
>                            -- The Other Microsoft Secrets (unpublished)
>> And, there is at least one Ada compiler available which compiles to
>> J-Code, so making Ada as platform-independent as Java.
>More so.  Can anybody name  one  CPU with a JVM that doesn't already
>have an Ada compiler?
>Now how many CPUs have Ada but not JVM?

This is a bit ingenuous. If you were to have a stored program in a database
(e.g. replace PL/SQL's stored code method (p-code?) with J-code) then you
really wouldn't want it to be hardware specific (J-Code is a very compact
representation). The whole point of Java's byte code is it's cross platform
capability, who would want to squander this in _every_ situation?