Re: [Jython-dev] Map interface for PyDictionary...

[<bc...@wo...>]

[Finn Bock]

> The real problem with this approach is java1 compatibility. It is an
> unmoving requirement that jython can be used in a java1 browser like IE.

[Robert W. Bill]

>This 'unmoving' part makes me curious.  I would like to
>hear more of the reasoning behind it.

This is my personal opinion, but as long the default JVM on windows is
1.1.4, I prefer to stay on that as the minimum requirement.

>The conditional sounds like:
>    1. We must support Java1 browsers, so 
>    2. we must support Java1 compatibility.
>
>This often repeated scenario assumes there's no other way to
>support these browsers, and there is no other reason
>given for Java1 compatibility.

The fact that you most likely can point your browser to

  http://jython.sourceforge.net/applets/index.html

and see a jython applet is IMHO such a valuable marketing point, that I
will loath to lose it.

>However:
>    1. Java2 plug-in is intended to support such browsers, and
>    2. it seems there must be other reasons involved in
>       choosing Java1 compatibility, so
>    3. both antecedent and consequent of the conditional
>       seem arbitrary and flimsy to me.
>
>Does the Java2 plug-in not work well?  

I'm sure it works perfectly. I don't make applets myself, so I'm not
familiar with the features and possible tradeoff with the java2 plug-in.

>Is there a legal
>implication to requiring the plug-in that bothers people?
>Are there essential tools other than browsers that lack 1.2
>drivers/support?  Are embedded or real-time-Java ventures
>working only with Java1?  Does Java1 compatibility increase
>chances of eventually working with alternative JVM's? 
>
>Without additional reasons, someone could propose:
>    *"The Java2 plug-in enables Java2 for most broswers"
>    *"Java1 compatibility is not essential for Java1 browsers
>      because of the Java2 plug-in"
>    *"Unless other valid reasons are proposed, using
>      Java2 with the plug-in is reasonable."
>
>I expected more of a discussion after last years conference.  
>See:
>http://www.python.org/pipermail/jpython-interest/2000-January/005222.html

Unfortunately, I was not attending the conference, so I don't know what
the discussion turned up.

Deciding that java2 is the requirement, would make certain things easier
for the jython-dev'ers, but would not gain anything usefull for the
users. We can still include java2 features in jython, it is just more
difficult to do so. 

I predict that I will remain unmoved, at least until there is a java2
feature that is impossible to implement without braking java1
compatibility. I have not yet seen such a feature.

PS. Please keep in mind that a java2 requirement isn't needed to improve
the support for java2 collections in jython. We can still do that, but
first there are some issues regarding the exact design of mutability
that must be finalized.

regards,
finn