Re: get CPU info, RAM info

From:

Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:33:53 -0400

Message-ID:

<hq4gar$r6i$1@news.eternal-september.org>

On 4/13/2010 10:24 PM, Arne Vajh?j wrote:

On 13-04-2010 21:44, Mike Schilling wrote:

Arne Vajh?j wrote:

On 12-04-2010 08:44, Eric Sosman wrote:

On 4/12/2010 4:54 AM, Roedy Green wrote:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 22:21:07 -0700, "Mike Schilling"
<mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :

The OS-specific parts of the JRE [1] are, of course, precisely
stuff that's
been tweaked to work on all supported platforms.

File i/o, networking etc are basically the same on all platforms.

Roedy, you should get out more. ;-)

The C and POSIX standards define a lot. And most platforms are
either compliant or close.

Perhaps this has changed since I worried about this stuff, but at one
time
"POSIX compliant" meant "A simple-minded test suite could be made to
compile
and run", not that you'd actually use the POSIX interfaces for
anything that
mattered.

POSIX is pretty thin in many contexts. Way smaller than the
Java library.

It is not sufficient to create portable applications in general.

But for the topics mentioned "File i/o, networking" I think it
will do very well.

It seems to me that "{Java,POSIX} can do {files,nets} on all
systems" is being mis-read as "{Java,POSIX} can do all kinds of
{files,nets}." My point -- and it's not new, nor complicated --
is that the former is achieved by making the latter untrue. Again,
two of my counter-examples: Where are the {Java,POSIX} interfaces
for {resource forks,DECnet}?

The response "Who needs 'em?" may cover a lot of cases, but
it surely does not cover all.

--
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid