how long java 1.0 has developed?

[jrefactors]

I know Java 1.0 was release in 1995. But I want to know how long it
took to design Java programming language for Java 1.0.

any ideas??

 

[Roland]

I know Java 1.0 was release in 1995. But I want to know how long it
took to design Java programming language for Java 1.0.

any ideas??

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_programming_language>
--
Regards,

Roland de Ruiter
` ___ ___
`/__/ w_/ /__/
/ \ /_/ / \

 

[Roedy Green]

I know Java 1.0 was release in 1995. But I want to know how long it
took to design Java programming language for Java 1.0.

It was originally designed for set top TV boxes in a language called
Oak. I would guess that was a fairly quick effort, perhaps a couple
of years. Sun did not get the contract for the boxes, and someone
noticed that with a few mods the thing would create a beautiful
Internet multiplatform language for writing Applets.


--
Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

....[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java newsgroups,
and in particular not quote from simplistic websites like infowars nor make
silly phrases like "Bush crime family". You're inviting an OT political
flaming. And those things just go on forever, and with everyone losing.

If having such a battle is what you're really after, then you had better
rethink your motives for being in these groups at all.

 

[Lee Fesperman]

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java newsgroups,
and in particular not quote from simplistic websites like infowars nor make
silly phrases like "Bush crime family". You're inviting an OT political
flaming. And those things just go on forever, and with everyone losing.

If having such a battle is what you're really after, then you had better
rethink your motives for being in these groups at all.

You quoted his sig, which are not normally part of the discussions in c.l.j.p. And, you
omitted the all important "--space".

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

Lee Fesperman coughed up:

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on
video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java
newsgroups, and in particular not quote from simplistic websites
like infowars nor make silly phrases like "Bush crime family".
You're inviting an OT political flaming. And those things just go
on forever, and with everyone losing.

If having such a battle is what you're really after, then you had
better rethink your motives for being in these groups at all.

You quoted his sig, which are not normally part of the discussions in
c.l.j.p. And, you omitted the all important "--space".

Yes. And my statements still stand---whether or not they are part of the
discussions, signatures are viewed by most people. Political flame wars are
a reality here, and a desire to stir them up in a technical forum is
evidence of a desire to disrupt the newsgroup.

Your point about the --{space} is a good one---had I thought to keep it in,
then the same people who would not normally have seen his signature, would
not have seen my complaint either, which would have been better even though
they'd see a blank message from me. For that I'm sorry.

 

[.]

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java newsgroups,
and in particular not quote from simplistic websites like infowars nor make
silly phrases like "Bush crime family". You're inviting an OT political
flaming. And those things just go on forever, and with everyone losing.

Until you posted you message this was a non-issue. Your desire to control
what other people do in this newsgroup has now made this something that is
taking up space in the newsgroup.

I've never understood why people just cannot ignore things like this. It
seems obvious to me that Roedy wants to push some buttons and you have
just validated him my focusing on it.

If having such a battle is what you're really after, then you had better
rethink your motives for being in these groups at all.

Check out mindprod.com and you will see that Roedy does have an interest
in Java programming. You will also see that he is not one to shy away from
politics.

I figured he was entitled to his opinion but that this was not the place
for me to agree or disagree with that opinion. I choose to ignore his
signature.

I didn't want to start a discussion about politics in this newsgroup and I
thought the best way to make this happen was to just ignore it. I'm not
sure what you hoped to gain by highlighting Roedy's signature.

 

[Virgil Green]

Lee Fesperman coughed up:

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on
video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java
newsgroups, and in particular not quote from simplistic websites
like infowars nor make silly phrases like "Bush crime family".
You're inviting an OT political flaming. And those things just go
on forever, and with everyone losing.

If having such a battle is what you're really after, then you had
better rethink your motives for being in these groups at all.

You quoted his sig, which are not normally part of the discussions in
c.l.j.p. And, you omitted the all important "--space".

Yes. And my statements still stand---whether or not they are part of
the discussions, signatures are viewed by most people. Political
flame wars are a reality here, and a desire to stir them up in a
technical forum is evidence of a desire to disrupt the newsgroup.

Your point about the --{space} is a good one---had I thought to keep
it in, then the same people who would not normally have seen his
signature, would not have seen my complaint either, which would have
been better even though they'd see a blank message from me. For that
I'm sorry.

Ignore sigs. There's only a flame ware if you (generally speaking) bother
responding to it.

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

"." coughed up:

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on
video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java
newsgroups, and in particular not quote from simplistic websites
like infowars nor make silly phrases like "Bush crime family".
You're inviting an OT political flaming. And those things just go
on forever, and with everyone losing.

Until you posted you message this was a non-issue. Your desire to

*BULLSHIT* Until *he* posted that crap it was a non-issue. It's
disruptive, and if he did not do it there would be fewer flame wars. Don't
tell me that its the reaction to something offensive that is the
problem----it's the thing that is offensive.

You think political flame wars happen in a vacuum? They happen when people
start voicing political opinions like he did. He's trying to push buttons,
like you said, and when someone does that, they should be asked to stop.

 

[.]

"." coughed up:

...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on
video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java
newsgroups, and in particular not quote from simplistic websites
like infowars nor make silly phrases like "Bush crime family".
You're inviting an OT political flaming. And those things just go
on forever, and with everyone losing.

Until you posted you message this was a non-issue. Your desire to

*BULLSHIT* Until *he* posted that crap it was a non-issue. It's
disruptive, and if he did not do it there would be fewer flame wars. Don't
tell me that its the reaction to something offensive that is the
problem----it's the thing that is offensive.

You think political flame wars happen in a vacuum? They happen when people
start voicing political opinions like he did. He's trying to push buttons,
like you said, and when someone does that, they should be asked to stop.

I think political flame wars happen between TWO or more people.

I have no control over what feelings someone can incite in me. Roedy can
put things in his signature that makes me angry or happy. I have no
control over that. What I can control is my reaction to it. I don't see
the point of bringing attention to something in Roedy's signature that has
nothing to do with this newsgroup.

My question still stands unanswered: What do you expect to gain by
starting this thread?

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

"." coughed up:

"." coughed up:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Thomas G. Marshall wrote:


...[rip]...

Bush crime family lost/embezzled $3 trillion from Pentagon.
Complicit Bush-friendly media keeps mum. Rumsfeld confesses on
video.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm

Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes

You'll probably do better if you keep politics out of the java
newsgroups, and in particular not quote from simplistic websites
like infowars nor make silly phrases like "Bush crime family".
You're inviting an OT political flaming. And those things just go
on forever, and with everyone losing.

Until you posted you message this was a non-issue. Your desire to

*BULLSHIT* Until *he* posted that crap it was a non-issue. It's
disruptive, and if he did not do it there would be fewer flame wars.
Don't tell me that its the reaction to something offensive that is
the problem----it's the thing that is offensive.

You think political flame wars happen in a vacuum? They happen when
people start voicing political opinions like he did. He's trying to
push buttons, like you said, and when someone does that, they should
be asked to stop.

I think political flame wars happen between TWO or more people.

I have no control over what feelings someone can incite in me. Roedy
can put things in his signature that makes me angry or happy. I have
no control over that. What I can control is my reaction to it. I
don't see the point of bringing attention to something in Roedy's
signature that has nothing to do with this newsgroup.

Then what is the point in responding to me?

My question still stands unanswered: What do you expect to gain by
starting this thread?

I didn't start this thread, roedy did the minute he placed inflamatory
political nonsense into a post. You have perpetuated this by responding to
my post. What do you expect to gain by posting a response to me?

 

[Chris Smith]

You think political flame wars happen in a vacuum? They happen when people
start voicing political opinions like he did. He's trying to push buttons,
like you said, and when someone does that, they should be asked to stop.

I can't agree with that in the slightest bit. As long as Roedy is
posting on-topic content in this newsgroup, his signature is his
business. There is nothing verbally abusive in Roedy's signature.
Flame wars are not the fault of someone expressing an idea that you
don't like (which is, after all, a vital and indispensable part of
actually participating in society), but rather someone who gets out of
hand in responding to it.

I strongly object to the idea that newsgroups need to be sterile and
isolated from the world, as if we were getting automatic responses from
intelligent machines instead of talking to real people who care about
real events and relationships.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

Chris Smith coughed up:

....[rip]...

I strongly object to the idea that newsgroups need to be sterile and
isolated from the world,

I never said that they should be sterile and isolated from the world, so
stop implying I did and come up with a better argument.

as if we were getting automatic responses
from intelligent machines instead of talking to real people who care
about real events and relationships.

I'm hardly one of those advocating sterile newsgroups.

1. I have no issue with off topic subjects per se. None, so long as they
don't involve one of two things (as near as I can tell):

a. politics
b. racism.

I am far from the kind of person that hollers about off topic replies in
general. Because I know the folks in the newsgroup, I am often *part* of an
OT thread. I actually *like* the people here and how they think and that
reason alone is enough that I appreciate most manners of OT discussion. I
am not asking for things to be sterile. I am /stating outright/ that if
your intent is to start OT-flame-wars in a technical newsgroup, then you
should knock it off.

2. I'm not one of the multitude to belly ache endlessly about cross posting
either. The ill effects (if there are any) of crossposting are blown /way/
out of proportion, and people complain because they think they should.

3. I don't generally even complain about top posting until someone top posts
over a message already bottom posted.

 

[Dale King]

I can't agree with that in the slightest bit.

I have to agree with Thomas. I too was offended by Roedy's signature. I
know Roedy well enough to know his political views, but usually he tries
to separate it out.

As long as Roedy is
posting on-topic content in this newsgroup, his signature is his
business.

I disagree. Just because he posts good stuff does not give him a free
ride to do what he pleases. Roedy has wasted the group's time with
off-topic political rants in the past (and almost caused Patricia to
throw a temper tantrum ;-). See this thread about his conspiracy theory
about 9/11 where he claims the govt. was lying about how many deaths
there were:

<http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/d989547983ee72f3/500e988037fc655a>

Let me take a quote from that thread that I think fits this situation
perfectly:

"Roedy, why are you doing this? I know that you know better. I have a
lot of respect for what you've done for a lot of the Java newcomers in
this group and for the tremendous Java programming resource you can
provide, but that does *not* give you the right to spam the group with a
conspiracy theory...that doesn't relate to Java. People who
are interested can follow this subject in other ways, using their own
choices of information sources."

Do you know who wrote those words to Roedy 4 1/2 years ago, Chris?? YOU DID!

There is nothing verbally abusive in Roedy's signature.

Baloney! Accusing the president of war crimes is not considered abusive
or offensive?

Flame wars are not the fault of someone expressing an idea that you
don't like (which is, after all, a vital and indispensable part of
actually participating in society), but rather someone who gets out of
hand in responding to it.

I strongly object to the idea that newsgroups need to be sterile and
isolated from the world, as if we were getting automatic responses from
intelligent machines instead of talking to real people who care about
real events and relationships.

Roedy's politically charged offensive signature has no business here.
This is a group about Java programming and that is what posts should be
about. Posting crap that is only meant to be offensive does not belong
here. That kind of stuff is *meant* to incite a flame war. I give Thomas
credit for not flaming Roedy, but asking him politely to take the hate
speech somewhere else.

The issue is about being on-topic not being sterile. Sometimes the group
will drift into off-topic political discussions. We understand that. It
is another thing entirely to repeatedly post offensive stuff that
encourages that.

 

[Chris Smith]

I disagree. Just because he posts good stuff does not give him a free
ride to do what he pleases. Roedy has wasted the group's time with
off-topic political rants in the past

Sorry to make a big deal out of this. I still see a large difference
between a signature line and what you're referring to. I completely
agree that political posts are out of place here. We just don't seem to
agree about what a signature line really is. I don't look at it as
group content. I don't choose a different signature depending on what
my post is about. A signature identifies who someone is, what they care
about, who they are affiliated with, etc... and from what I know of
Roedy, his current signature does that very well.

In any case, I'll drop it; Roedy will decide as he pleases anyway.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[iamfractal]

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
(Snipz)

Amazing that aboriginal Australians have such power in the U.S. ...


..ed

 

[Chris Uppal]

You're inviting an OT
political flaming. And those things just go on forever, and with
everyone losing.

You'll note that whatever the acceptability of politically active commentary in
the .sig parts of posts, whatever the legitimacy of Roeady's views, whatever
the truth about Bush, it is actually /your/ post that has triggered what looks
as if it could easily be a long-running, irritating, and frequently offensive,
thread.

-- chris

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

Chris Uppal coughed up:

You'll note that whatever the acceptability of politically active
commentary in the .sig parts of posts, whatever the legitimacy of
Roeady's views, whatever the truth about Bush, it is actually /your/
post that has triggered what looks as if it could easily be a
long-running, irritating, and frequently offensive, thread.

It is actually Roedy's post. You must follow causality properly.
Otherwise, it is equally valid to claim that *you* are furthering this
thread needlessly and are somehow culpable.

 

[Chris Uppal]

[me:]
You'll note that whatever the acceptability of politically active
commentary in the .sig parts of posts, whatever the legitimacy of
Roeady's views, whatever the truth about Bush, it is actually /your/
post that has triggered what looks as if it could easily be a
long-running, irritating, and frequently offensive, thread.

It is actually Roedy's post. You must follow causality properly.

I think I do -- Roedy posted many, many, times with no response (to that aspect
of his posts). You posted once.

Otherwise, it is equally valid to claim that *you* are furthering this
thread needlessly and are somehow culpable.

I agree; I have added to the problem. I regret that. I did think carefully
before "contributing" to this thread, and I thought I had sufficient reason,
but it seems the effort was in vain.

You will join Roedy in my killfile.

-- chris

 

[Virgil Green]

Chris Uppal coughed up:

It is actually Roedy's post. You must follow causality properly.
Otherwise, it is equally valid to claim that *you* are furthering this
thread needlessly and are somehow culpable.

That just cracks me up. The sub(off)-topic of this thread was initiated
precisely because you chose to take offense based upon someone's sig and
decided you had to speak your mind about it. Roedy did *not* bring this up
as a discussion point and has not even contributed to the sub-topic. *You*
are the cause of the sub-topic. I've contributed only for my personal
enjoyment.