From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Mar 6 10:25:53 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2249437B402 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from caddis.yogotech.com (caddis.yogotech.com [206.127.123.130]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA29244; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:25:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by caddis.yogotech.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g26IPc535267; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:25:38 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15494.24353.988127.429845@caddis.yogotech.com> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:25:37 -0700 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Nate Williams , Raymond Wiker , Giorgos Keramidas , "Steve B." , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: C vs C++ In-Reply-To: <3C865E41.960B4E7@mindspring.com> References: <20020305132457.A4700-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org> <001701c1c481$d0d5eab0$f642d9cf@DROID> <20020305231252.GC5328@hades.hell.gr> <3C8568E0.76415D99@mindspring.com> <20020306032029.GA7926@hades.hell.gr> <15494.13878.219807.949085@raw.grenland.fast.no> <15494.20631.682803.383406@caddis.yogotech.com> <3C865E41.960B4E7@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.96 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > Anyway, I *really* can't see any reason not to use , > > > , and friends. > > > > The fact that the programmer has no control over *how* the data is > > displayed, and relies on the person who wrote the class to display the > > data is one good reason. > > Not to mention that the libraries to which you link are > most likely written in C, and will use the conflicting > stdio paradigm. > > Personally, I avoid stream I/O. Java's reliance on stream > I/O is one of its worst attributes, IMO. Java practically > *encourages* the interpretation of partial contents of a > stream before the who has arrived. This is changing. I was at a Bof and JavaOne a few years ago where a number of us whined about this to the Sun engineers. JDK1.4 has a new I/O paradigm that (supposedly) fixes a number of the issues. > Java repeats Microsoft's mistake, and then codifies it into > necessity. See above. > Maybe you can blame this on the design of MIME, such that > not everything can be done correctly in a single pass, > unless you know that you have the entire encapsulated > message in hand. On the other hand, given that MIME is a > reality, maybe you can blame it on using the wrong tool > for the job. MIME became the solution because it was the first to solve *a* job. (Sort like VHS vs. BETA). Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message