Slashdot Mirror
Sun to Release Java Source Code
pete314 writes "After resisting for years, Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz at JavaOne this morning said that he will release the source code for Java. The company is asking developers to provide feedback on how to best get there and prevent forking and fragmentation."
"After resisting for years, Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz at JavaOne this morning said that he will release the source code for Java.
:-/
BZZT! WRONG! Java source code has been available for YEARS! (And no, I'm not going to bother linking. If you don't already know where to find the SCSL and JRL licensed code by now, you need to pull your head out of your butt and Google it.)
This article is nothing but a blurb that suggests that Sun is looking at Open Sourcing Java. (What the Slashdot pundits have been screaming for, for years now.) Unfortunately, one of OSI's core requirements is forking. So Java will never be able to make the pundits happy.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
No, thats the LGPL. GPL is everything that extends it or links to it. LGPL is only for the code itself and not linking code. Thats why glibc is LGPL instead of GPL.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Even in this here Slashdot page, I see the java tag used all over the source code for this page.
/. who don't know this.
For the bazillionth time, Javascript is not Java. I can't believe there are people on
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
I think that the reason Java doesn't want forking is to make sure that a program one person writes will always work on all Java interpreters. Sounds familiar to Knuth's concepts about TeX. The way they achieved it was by prohibiting new derivatives from being released under the same name (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeX#License) and those using TeX in their name must pass a rigorous test suite. The license is not GPL compatible, but perhaps Java could adopt something similar?
Actually, that could be a good enough reason for them to release it GPL, and have a dual license option for some other Sun licenses.
However, I think they are more worried about Eclipse than MS at this point, and I doubt Eclipse would shy away from forking a GPL Java. Sun doesn't want the source of forks to be available for them to use - they want no forks to begin with. They are control freaks when it comes to their projects.
Really it'll come down to IBM and Sun working out some arrangement where the code for Java is available under an OSI license, but where Sun still has some sort of the control it desires. Given that Java is developoment is partly a community process anyhow, you'd think there would be some way they could attain that.
Well, for one thing, it is slower than native code.
Patently false. It has been false for years now. Ever since Chris Rijk published his earth shattering benchmarks. (More recent benchmarks here.)
It's now down to the skill of the programmer. A good programmer will write speedy code, and a bad programmer will write garbage. Who'da'thunk?
For another, its garbage collection has a tendency to result in really bad performance stalls
When was the last time you used Java? 1.1? The modern hotspot JVM uses a generational collector which should NEVER stall during runtime unless it begins running into memory pressure. Go try this game and tell us how many stalls you see. If you think that's too "simple", try this one.
For another, its portability has been hampered by not fully supporting interesting OS features, which means that there are all these OS-specific extensions to add things like audio support,
Is there something wrong with the javax.sound packages? I'm REALLY thinking that you haven't tried Java since 1.1.
They don't integrate well with other apps, don't do a good job of supporting OS services, etc.
Psst!
Finally, Java makes it hard to add debug functionality into your code without a performance hit.
That's just a weak argument. Debugging info can really screw up a codebase and should be removed after debugging. But if you're wedded to the idea, get one of the three billion preprocessors that are available.
The bottom line is that pretty much any compiled language has great advantages over Java.
The bottom line is that you haven't used Java since the days of 1.1, but you feel that you're fully qualified to make statements about a platform you know nothing about. Whether you intend to or not, you are trolling, sir. So I would ask you to stop spreading FUD by not commenting on Java until you are again familiar with the platform.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Finally, Java makes it hard to add debug functionality into your code without a performance hit.
That's just a weak argument. Debugging info can really screw up a codebase and should be removed after debugging. But if you're wedded to the idea, get one of the three billion preprocessors that are available.
Actually, you can use the assert facility (since Java 1.4, I believe) to achieve something similar as a pre-processor out of the box.
Specificly, about 60% down the document, the following can be read regarding removing any assertion code from the resulting class files:
Removing all Trace of Assertions from Class Files
Programmers developing applications for resource-constrained devices may wish to strip assertions out of class files entirely. While this makes it impossible to enable assertions in the field, it also reduces class file size, possibly leading to improved class loading performance. In the absence of a high quality JIT, it could lead to decreased footprint and improved runtime performance.
The assertion facility offers no direct support for stripping assertions out of class files. The assert statement may, however, be used in conjunction with the "conditional compilation" idiom described in JLS 14.20, enabling the compiler to eliminate all traces of these asserts from the class files that it generates:
What stops them from adopting one of the existing open source VMs, "embracing and extending" it (still open source, of course), and doing that now?
You do know that Microsoft gave the Kaffe project money, right? The stipulation was that Kaffe had to add Microsoft extensions to its codebase. Turns out, Kaffe never managed to produce a competitive VM (though it's looking pretty good these days) and thus never had the impact that Microsoft had hoped for.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Well, it's been available since 1999. Seeing as it has taken slashdot—oh about—7 years to figure it out, you can understand why I'm a little peeved over the number of responders who've claimed that the source isn't available.
If you have a problem with the SCSL license, fine. If you have a problem with the JRL license, fine. But to claim that Sun hasn't released the source code? That's just frustrating.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade