[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lucent Technologies & Sun Microsystems
>Consider Limbo as NetC and Java as NetBasic. Each has its own audience - NetC >mainly for programmers and NetBasic for other people. Actually, from everything I've been able to tell, Limbo is NetC, and Java is NetC++. Java has taken some of the sharp edges off C++, and added garbage collection. Limbo appears to have taken the sharp edges off C, and added garbage collection. Both of them appear to have learned from the predecessors and made very similiar decisions about what the mistakes of the "last generation" were. Java really does appear to be "Limbo++" (i.e. Limbo with objects, not "one more than Limbo") to me.. And that's where the comparison can be best made. I just don't see a "NetBasic" comparison by any definition of Basic I've ever encountered.. And the strength of an OO language, to some degree, is the number of "standard" objects that are available. For that reason, defining lots of objects (i.e. APIs) is a strength for Java, not a weakness. For a language targetted at embedded work, you don't want the clutter, you just want a language that can do everything you might need. So why is everyone so utterly anti-Java? It looks to me like it will have a place in the universe, possibly along-side Limbo, for the very reason that C++ has a role while C stays a viable language.. An Embedded C Programmer who thinks Java is cool, Keith Graham firstname.lastname@example.org P.S. If I were to ship an actual product with Limbo/Inferno, what's the per-board or per-system licensing costs?