Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sun Lowers Barriers to Open-Source Java

Posted by Zonk on from the coffee-making-made-easy dept.

Shyane writes "Sun Microsystems is making it easier for open-source programmers to ensure their Java versions meet the company's compatibility requirements, but the deal extends only to those involved in Sun's own open-source Java project. The program grants access to its Java Technology Compatibility Kit to anyone with an open-source Java project that is based substantially on Sun's open-source Java software and governed by the GPL. Programmers need access to the test kit to prove that a project is in compliance with the Java specification. Projects that pass Sun's compatibility kit tests also can use the official Java logos for free."

5 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. Java == Nice Toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I've said it once, I'll say it again. Java is a nice toy programming language, for those people who can't afford a 'real' compiler, Like Borland, or Even Microsoft. Hell, even GCC does a better job than most java interpreters.

    It's a nice learning language, shielding the user from most of the complexity of a real programming language, and that's exactly what makes it so dangerous and stupid.

    This only serves to prove the theory. Only useful in bullshit GPL licensed projects. Let me know when the dream of 'write once run anywhere actually happens.

    1. Re:Java == Nice Toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Ever see how many VB jobs there used to be. Or "AJAX" "Web 2.0" now. Java is a fad language, little understood by managers who want the new best thing. Then of course they need all new hardware because performance sucks so much. It had really good potential to be a cross platform system but little by little the incompatibilities cropped up.

  2. Too little, too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    But then again, Java always was slow.

    (ya ya, except when it's called an assembly language math function in its library)

  3. Re:Openness! by fm6 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Give us a break. So nobody's bothered to implement a proper Java for a third-place OS running on an obsolete hardware platform. Next you'll be complaining that Java isn't available for your C64!

    People seem to think it's some kind of evil plot when a software vendor doesn't support their favorite platform. The fact is, every platform you support adds a lot to your development and QA costs. If there's no business case (and there certainly isn't for any PPC platform), why should they spend the money.

    And don't hold your breath waiting for some OSS folks to port Java to PPC/Linux. Even OSS people have to eat.

  4. Re:Java Programmers == Typists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Failure #1: Java's compiler is written in Java. The first use of the early Oak/Java VM was to get the compiler self-compiling. Then explain why there's a "javac.exe" under Windows and:

    $ file -L `which javac`
    /usr/bin/javac: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
    $ javac -version
    javac 1.6.0

    Failure #2: Java *can* bootstrap itself just fine, thank you very much. No, it can't. By definition you have to start with a JVM written in something that isn't Java. Otherwise your JVM is written in bytecode that nothing can run, since it isn't compiled to native code until runtime.

    Failure #3: You called Java an interpreted language. Java is a compiled language that runs on a virtual machine. By that definition, Python, Perl, and JavaScript are all compiled languages. All the current implementations of those languages compile the language into bytecodes which are then interpreted directly. Java and Python have the option of saving those bytecodes to a file and then skipping the parse step.

    But I already know you're a Java fanboi, which is rather pathetic.