On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 08:55:04PM +1000, jeff wrote:
> But I'll spare you that ranting; let's just say I think it's a
> horrifically bad idea to have a free-for-all in one's classpath.
I tend to agree, though I should point out that the opposite view
has support. For example, Per Bothner said in a previous thread,
In Java we have a global namespace, so the user/developer should
not have to specify classpaths etc by default.
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2001/debian-java-200104/msg00014.html)
I mention this because Per qualifies as something of an authority
IMO but has not not appeared on this list lately.
> Developer communities gradually gain experience, and if the Java
> community has learned anything, it's that **classpaths are evil**.
Do you think this is for some inherent reason (eg, the desire or
need for multiple implementations of API's), or simply because the
Java community has botched the idea of a global namespace (by making
incompatible changes without moving in the namespace)? Do you have
any references for this viewpoint?
Andrew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
