Especially when it comes to having to manually deal with things like
all over my code to deal with the triumvirate of platforms.
> The following sounds like something straight out of JoeK's mouth:
> > I find it depressing that, as the guy behind Emacs, when it comes to
> > writing an algorithm, Emacs is still the best tool around.
Hey! Look at that! Jim quoted me! <g>
Perhaps someone will finally offer to publish my "Using Emacs as a
Java IDE" now...
> And I think the following oversimplifies the difference between CORBA
> and DCOM:
> > InfoWorld: So from your point of view DCOM and CORBA are transport
> > mechanisms?
> > Gosling: I don't care. It's how the bits get across. The CORBA stuff
> > has been around for a long time. Microsoft, for whatever reason,
> > decided to build their own thing that was exactly the same, just built
> > differently.
Sounds like Ron!
Of course, I _WOULDN'T_ say Microsoft's stuff is exactly the same,
just built differently than CORBA.
That's like saying the uber-space-toilet on the Space Shuttle is
exactly the same as a chemical toilet in an AirStream(TM) - they're
exactly the same, just built differently.
*NO*, they are _both_ toilets.
Sure, one costs $10,000,000 bucks, required 1000 people to design,
five years of work to build, and a month of serious training to use
correctly. Then, it's fine.
This, while the other is everywhere: dozens of little white boxes with
doors at every major rock concert and campground in the world. Of
course, that one *ALSO* took $10M and 1000 people to design and build,
everyone uses them differently (and some avoid them entirely,
prefering to nearly burst with their resistence), and *NO ONE*
understands how they really work. Oh, and sometimes they blow up.
<OBREF>It's almost as bad as non-dairy creamers and microwaves.</OBREF>
> What, no mention of HTTP-NG?
> :) Adam
You just did Adam.
-- Joseph R. Kiniry A1 F9 C5 8C B3 43 54 20 FA 20 63 80 53 C3 6D 85 California Institute of Technology ID 78860581 ICQ 4344804