Could Python supplant Java?

[d2002xx]

> goose wrote:
> > what kind of a system is that ? every system I've worked on
> > (other than windows) came with at least *ONE* compiler ...
> > and most let you rebuild the kernel as well ...
> 
> You just haven't worked on many different kinds of systems. 

But you didn't answer about rebuilding the kernel, or you just can't
answer?

> > > second because most tools
> > > shipped with the OS are out of date by the time they're
> > > pressed to the CD and require updates anyhow,
> > 
> > no. I'm still using VC5.something at home for windows work,
> > and I am STILL using gcc 2.95.something at home for all other
> > work ... no need to patch them, they work just fine ...
> 
> Then what's the problem with needing a compile server to make sure
> everyone's using the same version? ;-)

Why everyone's using the same version? It's just nonsense.

> > > and paying for development
> > > software is not a bad thing.
> > 
> > not in itself, no, but the system HAS to come with something.
> 
> Windows Scripting Language. The .NET compiler.

Shipped with Windows?

> > they *never* cowtowed to developers for as long as I
> > remember.
> 
> You've never bought MSDN, have you?

Shipped with Windows?

> > I never said it was impossible, I just said that it doesn't
> > come with windows, if you're a developer you have to put
> > half the system together yourself.
> 
> Why would "make" come with Windows when it comes with every compiler
> that needs something like Make? Most languages don't need Make, so
> what's the point?

Most *languages* don't need, but most *programs* need because they are
mostly written in C/C++.

> > the lack of a proper scripting environment means that the
> > rebuild and test process cannot be automated.
> 
> No, it just means you use whatever comes with the compiler, download
> it for free, or pay for it.

Shipped with Windows?

> > remember, i said  "out-the-box" way above ... out-the-box, windows
> > does not let you do this ... period ... of all the systems
> > in existence, windows is the only one where you have to pay more
> > just to get more developers onto it.
> 
> Uh, you've not used a lot of development environments. You think the
> compiler for (say) your cell phone's software runs on the cell
> phone?

Funny! So you use your PC as only a cell phone?

> > yeah, but they dont come with windows. so that story is out the
> > window (pun intended :-) ... the reason that other systems are
> > MORE developer friendly, is because they COME with most of what a
> > developer needs to develop.
> 
> Depends. If you're programming in the language that comes with the
> computer, yes. Otherwise, no. 

But none of them come with windows.

> > of all the systems I've worked on, only windows needs help to turn
> > it into a development machine, all the others install tools (or
> > prompt you on installation asking if you want to install)
> 
> Solaris doesn't come with a C compiler, last I looked. CP-V didn't
> come with compilers. CP/M didn't come with compilers. Neither your
> cell phone nor your TiVo come with a compiler installed. Nor does
> your Palm Pilot. Nor does the cash register at the store where you
> bought the computer.

So the windows' ability is as poor as Palm Pilot? Or some used in cell
phones?

> > Which is the only system to come without a *SINGLE* development
> > tool ?
> 
> Palm Pilot. CP/M. SunOS. 

Palm Pilot is not used in PC, it's too poor, why not say embedding
linux?
CP/M is ..... never heard, what's it?
SunOS is ..... dying... There is no need to use it. It's neither
better than linux nor supporting more applications as well as windows.

> Windows, on the other hand, comes with .NET compilers and the
> Windows Scripting Language. That you don't like *those* development
> tools doesn't mean they aint there.

"Comes with"? Are you sure?