|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 01:36 AM EDT |
If Google had released incompatible core
APIs
How could they? That is impossible. You could not use
Java
if they did that. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 06:49 AM EDT |
N/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tqft on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 06:50 AM EDT |
Looking at
http://gcc.gnu.org/java/
and
http://android-dls.com/wiki/index.php%3ftitle=Compiling_for_Android
gcc can convert java source code to either bytecode or machine language.
How and where does gcc "see" the api?
---
anyone got a job good in Brisbane Australia for a problem solver? Currently
under employed in one job.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SilverWave on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 07:44 AM EDT |
Yes this nails it.
Quote: "Imagine what would have happened if in 2007 Google did exactly what
Oracle is now insisting they should have done: release new, totally incompatible
core APIs in Android. Sun would have screamed bloody murder and rightly so.
Releasing incompatible core APIs would have truly fractured the Java community.
It would have been very difficult for developers to switch between using
Sun-Java and using Android-Java. There would be almost no code reuse between the
two systems. Anyone who tried to switch from one to the other would generate
tons of bugs as they tried to get their fingers accustomed to the new system. It
would be like changing around the keys on the keyboard. You could eventually get
used to the new layout but the transition would be difficult and your
productivity would plummet every time you switched from one to the other.
"
---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 10:56 AM EDT |
One of the methods of proving parallel lines never meet
is to simply assume
that they do meet somewhere way out
there where you can't see the convergence
point, then
considering that hypothesis, what would the interior angles
be of
a triangle constructed with a vertical line crossing
the parallel lines, and
the convergence point? Since the
internal angles of a triangle must add up to
180 degrees,
and the two angles at hand add up to 180 degrees, the third
angle
must be 0, and if we draw a line at 0 degrees to an
existing line that new line
would simply be a continuation
of the first, etc...
JBB invites us to
"Imagine what would have happened if in
2007 Google did exactly what Oracle is
now insisting they
should have done: release new, totally incompatible core
APIs in Android."
That is the same thing as imagining parallel lines
meeting, because if you create totally incompatible core
APIs for Java, it no
longer supports Java. You cannot
somehow magically "extend" Java by replacing
the core. This
would not be an extension - it would be a new language.
There
is no Java without the core. There is nothing there.
You can't even write c = a
+ b, where these are integers,
because you have no object class, and no "class"
class, and
you have no integers.
I just don't get why people feel this
discussion is in
any way useful to answering the judge's question - unless
you
frame it as I have framed a discussion on the question
of parallel lines
meeting.
I have given reasons in other comments why I think it is
bad
to have people suggesting Google could have avoided
using the Java API by
selecting different names and SSO. One
reason is that such a suggestion is
fodder for the fudsters,
who would like to use such a proposition to
demonstrate
Google's "callous and blatant infringement". "They could
have used
their own names and SSO but they stole Oracle's!"
Another concern is
the judge think Google could have
avoided this war with Oracle and "fragmenting
Java" by
simply having used different names and SSO, but "brazenly
chose not
to."
A third concern is: What if the judge is pondering a
possible
compromise? Suppose he is thinking it won't be the
end of the world if he rules
in favour of Oracle because
Google could simply use different names and
SSO?
Is there anybody out there who understands what I am
trying to
say?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ghopper on Tuesday, May 08 2012 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
Nicely put. Nearly all existing libraries make use of one or
more of these
APIs. It would be painful to write a program
without them.
If
Google had released incompatible core APIs...
If Google had
changed these core APIs, then it wouldn't be
Java. It would be a different
language. And, by the way,
Google has developed several languages over the last
10
years. Java isn't perfect, but the popularity and installed
base compensate
for its deficiencies as a language.
Oracle is playing a dangerous game here.
If they get what
they are asking for, I predict Google will switch to a
different language entirely. This is what Microsoft did when
they fought over
Java in the 90s (eventually leading to C#).
I thought Sun had learned their
lesson, and that the JCP meant an open and
collaborative future for Java. Oracle apparently does not
agree. If Oracle
wins this battle, they wont like the long-
term result.
There is an
interesting (but lengthy) post on
blogspot from 2007 that covers some of the
difficulties of creating the
"next big language". If nothing
else, this post proves that engineers at Google
where
considering this issue when they made these decisions about
Android. A
great comment on scobleizer even mentions Java
Java, for example, is too
corporate, and is one of the reasons a
lot of people hate it. Until Sun
completely releases it under
the GPL, I know a lot of people who won't even
touch it. Java's
not that great of a language anyway.
I wonder if
Google could create a language that doesn't end up
turning evil.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|