Re: Split group?
Andrew Thompson wrote:
OTOH, I can see no sense splitting of the EE or ME
into separate groups. There are very few ME posts
(to my eye), and it would not make a viable group,
of its own right. For EE, the situation is more
summarised by the (hypothetical) question/title..
"Why my servlet throw NPE?"
This might be an EE question, but the problem might
also be something caused in J2SE, and indeed it is
probable that since the OP asked the question, they
have no clue which it is.
There may be three different responses to that one:
* Things involving basic stuff like NPE belong here by default. If the
cause turns out to be deeply entwined with networking/EJBs/whatever,
then refer them to the other group.
* Things involving servlets belong there by default. If the cause turns
out to be failing to initialize a class in its constructor, passing a
null in a clearly inappropriate place (e.g. System.arraycopy), or
whatever, then refer them here.
* Refer them to /dev/null. Anyone who writes something like that is
clearly too stupid ever to succeed at programming anything serious in
Java, and whoever hired them to work on a business servlet ought to be
fired too.
The elitist among you are free to exercise that third option via ^K or
whatever suits you, anyway.
(And what the devil is comp.lang.java.javascript for? ..
Applets in DHTML, especially when the JS and applet
are interacting directly with each other.
Why not just say "Things no sane person will ever let near Firefox, let
alone IE"? JS is so full of holes it isn't funny, and can easily let
applets effectively out of their sandbox, particularly when you throw in
the potential for cross-site-scripting vulnerabilities. (Picture this at
www.thieves-r-us.foo.ru: "<script language=javascript
src=evil.js><applet
src=http://www.chasemanhattan.com/bankingapplet.jar></script>..." Now
picture what the script might do, especially if the site looks
relatively legit and the user can be convinced to put sensitive
information into the applet...an applet their bank uses that's signed
and that they trust more than a generic bank login page...might this
catch people who don't fall for less sophisticated phishes?)
Note that AFAIU, it is not an official 'big 8' group,
though it is carried by many servers. As such, I am
guessing it would be almost impossible to 'kill' it,
so long as servers carry it, and people post to it.
If that's the case, it explains why PofN, who's so deathly afraid of
crossposts, is so deathly afraid of any group changes. It would mean the
number of groups can't actually decrease, only increase, and will
increase if new group names come into use, and under PofN's pet theory
people will frequently crosspost to all of them at once, and the more
there are ...