Yeah, actually I have noticed and was well aware of it when making my comment. The topic of this particular comment thread, however, was specifically about the first graph since the mentioned link's validity was being "defended" by saying the graph was not an "inheritance / 'paternity' graph".
In fact, I could have also mentioned myself that the link was taken off the second graph to further my case that it was just plain wrong. The only reason I did not was because I thought it was something so obvious it would not be necessary to state it.
Comments
So you agree with the diagram is stating: that JavaScript fixes Java's syntax by using the same C-like syntax?
No, the given reason for Java -> JavaScript is completely wrong. I'd understand if the reason was "Java browser applets suck", but syntax?
Have you not noticed that the link you're complaining about is in PG's original essay, and the newer version has no link between Java and JavaScript?
Yeah, actually I have noticed and was well aware of it when making my comment. The topic of this particular comment thread, however, was specifically about the first graph since the mentioned link's validity was being "defended" by saying the graph was not an "inheritance / 'paternity' graph".
In fact, I could have also mentioned myself that the link was taken off the second graph to further my case that it was just plain wrong. The only reason I did not was because I thought it was something so obvious it would not be necessary to state it.