Content deleted Content added
→Possible Fallacy in Feature comparison: just keywords? |
|||
Line 376:
:::Java does not have events as a first class feature, and not as a language feature. Period. If you consider java.util then yes, there is a conventional way to ''implement'' events. However, AWT has no place in this article. AWT is a framework built ''using'' the language, in no way can it be presented as part of the language or even the core library. Events are defined in java.util and if this article should allow "core" libraries then Java+core library can be said to feature events. [[User:Useerup|Useerup]] ([[User talk:Useerup|talk]]) 15:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
::::So, it's just the reserved keywords, then? --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 19:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
:::::Nice straw-man. Try taking this seriously, please. You can do a comparison of languages which is not just keywords but actual features. Personally I feel that we should take some of the common/base class libraries into consideration, too. But definitely ''not'' AWT. What would be next? JSP/JSF/ASP.NET/WCF because you can not do "anything" server-side without those, like you cannot do anything GUI without AWT. Next we have the entire platforms in here and will again be pondering how to split it up. This *is* the language comparison. AWT belongs somwhere else. [[User:Useerup|Useerup]] ([[User talk:Useerup|talk]]) 17:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
| |||