Slashdot Mirror
Improving The Java Core Library
dautelle writes "Many Java developers are frustrated by the not-so-open process to improve/correct/augment the Java core libraries. Unless you work for Sun or belong to a JSR expert group, there is very little you can do to influence the future of the Java platform. Even the JCP route can be a frustrating one (e.g. JSR-108 withdrawn by Sun because not enough progress made in a timely manner). To address this serious issue, the charter of the Java Addition to Default Environment (JADE for short) has been extended, along with the release of JADE 7.0. Participation to the jade.* package development is truly open (unlike javax.*). The library already provides numerous useful classes, bug fixes, enhanced implementations of existing classes, etc. Hopefully in the near future, the library could become so useful that it becomes a de-facto complement to the JDK."
I think the whole of Jade should be living in commons.apache.org somewhere
You mean: http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/
The Jakarta project is Apache's Java efforts. commons.apache.org used to hold common libraries such as APR for Apache HTTPD. These were mostly C libraries, I believe.
Apache Jakarta Commons (ok, so Apache needs to clean up and simplify there project namespace), rocks.
Here's there summary for commons-collections
* Bag interface for collections that have a number of copies of each object
* Buffer interface for collections that have a well defined removal order, like FIFOs
* BidiMap interface for maps that can be looked up from value to key as well and key to value
* MapIterator interface to provide simple and quick iteration over maps
* Type checking decorators to ensure that only instances of a certain type can be added
* Transforming decorators that alter each object as it is added to the collection
* Composite collections that make multiple collections look like one
* Ordered maps and sets that retain the order elements are added in, including an LRU based map
* Identity map that compares objects based on their identity (==) instead of the equals method
* Reference map that allows keys and/or values to be garbage collected under close control
* Many comparator implementations
* Many iterator implementations
* Adapter classes from array and enumerations to collections
* Utilities to test or create typical set-theory properties of collections such as union, intersection, and closure
For those doing Swing programming, also check out Java Desktop Network Components (JDNC) project (this isn't from Apache, unfortunately). The documentation isn't that great yet, but the API is all you need.
What about MS? I think that they also wanted to "embrace and extend" Java as well at some point.
My point is, that sometimes I feel like people think free software should always get its way as a matter of principle. The truth is, that you are free to write an alternative classpath. and distribute it with your own VM as it is. Quit moaning and join in with the guys at GNU Classpath. Sun doesn't mind. It's focusing on its own. That's what MS did.
To err is human, but to forgive is beyond the scope of the Operating System...
Yes, people could cram more and better functionality in there, and everyone is sure their idea will just make Java better; but every new version makes Java less and less portable. Adding the same functionality in a non-core library is every bit as effective, but doesn't add the additional requirement for a new version, and will avoid breaking and deprecating enormous existing bodies of code.
If you need new or better/differently implemented functionality, you are free to add it. If Java is unable to accomodate the addition outside the standard library, then the platform has failed.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm a fan of Java. But, if the core of a language needs to be constantly updated, its an unstable language, and bad for production development. I think Java can be stable, but it requires that the developers do just what they are. Keep the standard libraries standard, and not full of every shoehorned-in functionality they can think of. Its already bloated enough.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.