Home > Archive > Java Help > July 2004 > Re: still one Online Compiler +what compilation options?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: still one Online Compiler +what compilation options?
|
|
| trend5 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| I find still one online java compiler:
http://www.innovation.ch/java/java_compile.html
I was wondering if someone could explain what's Compilation Options
recommends to use compile Java applets?(works on all browsers)
Thanks,
trend5
---------------------------------------------------
Andrew Thompson <SeeMySites@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<14k4n7ltxr4p0$.yqlp9lfbezb6.dlg@40tude.net>...
> On 23 Jul 2004 07:17:25 -0700, trend5 wrote:
>
>
> If you need an on-line compiler, try the original
> (and best).. <http://www.physci.org/javac.jsp>
>
> I find it amazing they offer *only* 1.0.2 and 1.1.4
> (both obsolete) whereas mine offers 1.1.4 for those
> forced to work woth MS, as well as 1.1.8, 1.2.2,
> 1.3.1, and 1.4.2.
>
> Of course, the on-line compiler is intended more
> to test code for 'self contained' and provide
> versioniing services. Roedy made a good point
> about downloading your *own* version of the
> current Sun compiler, which makes much more sense.
| |
|
|
| trend5 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| Sorry, I asked my question incorrectly. What I need: I need that
Applet stable work on target browsers MSIE 5.0- 6.0 But if possible,
on latest Netscape also. No other versions required.
> You need a -target 1.1, with a -bootclasspath pointing to an '1.1' version rt.ja
Will this options OK for this?
By the way, is there some class files online Archiver which can
archive CLASS files in .JAR online (similar as online compiler)
======================================
Andrew Thompson <SeeMySites@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<w4muyiwsc0fz$.1ecyf4ym1baoi.dlg@40tude.net>...
> On 24 Jul 2004 12:38:07 -0700, trend5 wrote:
>
> Please do not..
> a) change subject lines
> b) top-post
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?th=5c68fea1036a059a>
>
>
> As I mentioned in an earlier post to you, there
> is a much better one..
> <http://www.physci.org/javac.jsp>
>
>
> Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!
>
> Do you people not *read* the group, this has been
> discussed to death several times over the last few
> days.
>
> CODING FOR 1.1 DOES NOT MEAN APPLET WILL WORK ALL BROWSER -
> IT DOES NOT EVEN MEAN THE APPLET WILL WORK IN ALL *IE*.
>
> (sheeesh!)
>
> But to answser your question, see here..
>
> <http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs...osscomp-options>
> You need a -target 1.1, with a -bootclasspath pointing
> to an '1.1' version rt.ja
| |
| Andrew Thompson 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| On 25 Jul 2004 07:59:18 -0700, trend5 wrote:
I gave the wrong link re top-posting,
have a look over this..
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#netiquette>
> Sorry, I asked my question incorrectly. What I need: I need that
> Applet stable work on target browsers MSIE 5.0- 6.0
If you compile for MSVM, your applet
will not not work on *ALL* IE.
IE comes now with NO java.
Many IE *had* Java but user removed it.
Many IE had Java but *sys admin* removed it.
Until you indicate you understand that
I cannot advise further.
--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
| |
| Roedy Green 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 15:12:00 GMT, Andrew Thompson
<SeeMySites@www.invalid> wrote or quoted :
>IE comes now with NO java.
>
>Many IE *had* Java but user removed it.
>Many IE had Java but *sys admin* removed it.
>
>Until you indicate you understand that
>I cannot advise further.
You know what he means. I suspect you would no more likely help him
get code working with the MS JVM than you would teach him how to shoot
up heroin.
It is a sort of treason to aid in that endeavor.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
| |
| Roedy Green 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 17:17:02 GMT, Roedy Green
<look-on@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote or quoted :
>
>You know what he means. I suspect you would no more likely help him
>get code working with the MS JVM than you would teach him how to shoot
>up heroin.
>
>It is a sort of treason to aid in that endeavor.
The intent of MS Java JVM was to destroy Java by supporting only parts
of Java and doing the support they did in non-standard ways, in
violation of their contract.
If failed to kill Java that way, but it succeeded as a decoy, making
people think they had Java when they did not. The courts ruled that MS
Java is not Java. This gave Java Applets a bad name, and Applets have
been all but been abandoned from MS treachery.
It is therefore long past time we should treat the JVM as the trojan
horse it really is, and refuse to accommodate it.
The argument you can give your boss are that MS no longer ships it and
no longer allows you to get a copy. It is DEAD. I tell you this
parrot is dead.
To put this turkey to rest, perhaps some philanthropist could sue
someone for using it.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
| |
| Andrew Thompson 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 17:17:02 GMT, Roedy Green wrote:
> You know what he means.
No I do not Roedy. I suspect* I know what he means,
but I have been over this whole thing too many times
in the past 72hrs without checking prior to doing
it yet again.
>..I suspect you would no more likely help him
> get code working with the MS JVM than you would teach him how to shoot
> up heroin.
Wrong. There *are* good reasons to develop
code that will work on the MSVM.
The JavaVersionApplet and JTest are just two
applets I have written which would not be very
effective unless they worked on the MSVM.
[ And if you intend to shoot up heroin (which
is a very stupid thing that I *don't* recommend),
I would suggest you use a sharp, clean needle
that you remove from the sterile wrapper yourself. ]
> It is a sort of treason to aid in that endeavor.
Probably, but if the OP convinced me they
had actual, rather than *perceived, need to
code for the MSVM, I would probably offer
whatever assistance I could.
* A lot of people are stuck in old ways and see '1.1'
as the 'runs everywhere' solution. It is not that
anymore, if it ever was.
--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
| |
| Andrew Thompson 2004-07-28, 9:08 pm |
| On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 18:02:27 GMT, Roedy Green wrote:
> The argument you can give your boss are that MS no longer ships it and
> no longer allows you to get a copy.
Now that I can work with.
...'dunno about the OP. ;-)
--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
| |
| trend5 2004-07-28, 9:09 pm |
| So, may be there is sense does not use Java at all, and use Macromedia
Flash instead? Since most users have Macromedia Flash support on their
PC.
Some of formerly Sun developers has told me that Java _Applets_ are
dead, Flash now can do almost everything that Applets were supposed to
do, but better.. Since I need Java only for Applet creation, so
probaly, Macromedia Flash is better alternative for me? There are
various standallone application for win32 for Flash creation.
****************************************
**********************8
Andrew Thompson <SeeMySites@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<dehi19qsawlm.2xo4v3u7o08q$.dlg@40tude.net>...
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 17:17:02 GMT, Roedy Green wrote:
>
>
> No I do not Roedy. I suspect* I know what he means,
> but I have been over this whole thing too many times
> in the past 72hrs without checking prior to doing
> it yet again.
>
>
> Wrong. There *are* good reasons to develop
> code that will work on the MSVM.
>
> The JavaVersionApplet and JTest are just two
> applets I have written which would not be very
> effective unless they worked on the MSVM.
>
> [ And if you intend to shoot up heroin (which
> is a very stupid thing that I *don't* recommend),
> I would suggest you use a sharp, clean needle
> that you remove from the sterile wrapper yourself. ]
>
>
> Probably, but if the OP convinced me they
> had actual, rather than *perceived, need to
> code for the MSVM, I would probably offer
> whatever assistance I could.
>
> * A lot of people are stuck in old ways and see '1.1'
> as the 'runs everywhere' solution. It is not that
> anymore, if it ever was.
| |
| Andrew Thompson 2004-07-28, 9:09 pm |
| On 26 Jul 2004 05:02:54 -0700, trend5 wrote:
> So, may be there is sense does not use Java at all, and use Macromedia
> Flash instead?
It depends what you are doing.. If it can be 100%
done in Flash, I'd say it is a strong contender.
For small projects, Flash development would be
significantly quicker, and the learning curve
for Java is much steeper.
...but, how do you expect *me* to know what's best
for your project? You have not described at any
stage what you wish to achieve, we have simply been
going round in circles trying to point out how 1.1
is not the generic 'solution' you seem to think it is.
--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
| |
| trend5 2004-07-28, 9:09 pm |
| I mean use Flash for
a) small Visual Effects Applets(like 3D Kaleidoscopes/3D
Starfield/LineBouncer-
http://javaboutique.internet.com/visual/index.html)
b)for more complex- database applet -like dbView Java Applet
http://www.alphatel.com/dbview.htm(loads a text file database and
displays the content in a window grid).
Andrew Thompson <SeeMySites@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<16xdnn4bqqr3o.18474oqn6mo9k.dlg@40tude.net>...
> On 26 Jul 2004 05:02:54 -0700, trend5 wrote:
>
>
> It depends what you are doing.. If it can be 100%
> done in Flash, I'd say it is a strong contender.
>
> For small projects, Flash development would be
> significantly quicker, and the learning curve
> for Java is much steeper.
>
> ..but, how do you expect *me* to know what's best
> for your project? You have not described at any
> stage what you wish to achieve, we have simply been
> going round in circles trying to point out how 1.1
> is not the generic 'solution' you seem to think it is.
|
|
|
|
|