Re: [vox] Gopher: New use for old software.

[Rod Roark <rod@sMAPSunsetsystems.com>]

It's a bit like Microsoft Java, as supported by Visual J++.
You can use it to write portable Java, but the MS 
documentation doesn't help you avoid the MS-specific 
extensions.

Basically MS has defined a portable API, but has also
extended it so that it can be used to write non-portable
apps, and you can bet they will do everything they can to
make sure that happens.

That way they get the standards-promoting "points" yet still
enjoy locking users into their platform.  It's exactly what
Sun wouldn't let them do with Java -- but this time they
have the legal right to do it.

Re DLLs -- in the Linux case it would be .so files.  Using
either introduces non-portability.

-- Rod
   http://www.sunsetsystems.com/

On Wednesday 05 June 2002 09:49 am, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> speaking of which, i have a question about last night's talk.
>
> is .NET code portable or not?
>
> i'm asking because of a strange thing he mentioned (paraphrase):
>
>      .NET code doesn't hide the details of the platoform.  it lets
>      differences of different the platform percolate through.
>
> what exactly does this mean?   it _sounds_ like .NET code is NOT
> platform independent.   a "detail" could be something like reading or
> writing an entry in the register to say "i'm installed".  or perhaps
> opening C:\WINDOWS\APPLICATION.INI rather than /etc/application.conf.
>
> if a person needs to make code platform agnostic by *coding* techniques
> rather than compilation/preprocessor techniques, i don't consider that
> platform agnostic.
>
> the speaker *said* .NET was platform agnostic.  yet what he was *saying*
> made it sound like it't not.   anyone have a take on this?
>
>
>
>
> i was also confused by:
>
>      .NET uses .dll files to link some code, but these would have
>      meaning on a linux platform too.
>
> how is this possible?   other than the obvious, of course.   i don't
> think the wine project will declare itself "done" anytime within the
> next 8 years.
>
> i know the theory of redirectors from playing around with dosemu source,
> but you need something to redirect to.  how can some random
> tom-dick-harry.dll have meaning on a linux system without have a
> call-by-call compatibility layer or redirector?
>
>
> pete (getting more confused the more i think about last night's talk)
>
>
> begin Stephen M. Helms <Mytho_X@pacbell.net>
>
> > >pete
> > >
> > >ps- stephen - i give you a "score:5, funny" for your title.
> >
> > Thanks, pete!
> >
> > I found it amusing as I mentioned gopher to Doug last night when Ted was
> > talking about web services and how everyone perceives www as the
> > internet.
> >
> > This bug is good proof that gopher is a *web* service ;)  Should I run
> > the gopher down a VPN Tunnel?
> >
> > Stephen

_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox