Simon Phipps on the Process of Opening Java 152
twofish writes "Simon Phipps, the chief open-source officer
at Sun Microsystems, has reaffirmed Sun's
commitment to Open Source in an interview
with computerworld.
The focus of the interview is Simon's efforts to fully open source Java.
He points out that many problems need to be resolved before
Java can be open sourced — ownership, legal, access, encumbrances and relationships
with Java licensees. It took Sun a full five years to solve these issues with
Solaris. However Simon predicts that it won't take anything near this amount
of time to complete the task with Java.
Of course, one of the other concerns for OS Java is the resulting incompatible
versions and breaking of the Java WORA
model (Gosling himself has always been particularly concerned about incompatible
forks resulting in the introduction of an open source version of Java) and this opens
up additional problems for the open source Java model."
JavaPosse discussion (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Someone has to say it (Score:5, Informative)
Naw. Here's the real deal, from someone who knows quite a few languages:
- Java is adequate for just about every programming task
- Java's generics are mostly adequate
- Java's GUI support is good once you let Swing twist your head into a fleshy knot
- Java's library support is above average
- Java's floating-point performance is quite good, especially with HotSpot
- The HotSpot runtime is freakin' amazing at what it does
- The Java language is wordy, which mostly has to do with strict typing (and lately, from adding generics)
- Server-side Java (JSPs, servlets, etc.) is unnecessarily complicated and probably designed by Satan himself
Hope that helps.
Re:Java already breaks the WORA model (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Exactly (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Exactly (Score:4, Informative)
You're somewhat misinformed. Sun's implementation has never been a basis for determining what's "standard". That's because Sun's implementation, like every other Java implementation (and there are quite a few [dwheeler.com]) is required to adhere to a written specification [sun.com].
People (including everybody at Sun) often say "Java" when they mean "Sun's Java implementation". That can be misleading. When you talk about "open sourcing Java" you're really talking about open sourcing a particular implementation of Java.
Re:Java already breaks the WORA model (Score:5, Informative)
In 6 or so years of doing server-side Java development, I have never needed to do that, nor have I ever heard of anyone needing to do so. I humbly suggest that if someone does find themselves needing to do so, they've done something very wrong.
Re:Java already breaks the WORA model (Score:2, Informative)
Re:open java equals forks for major vendors (Score:3, Informative)
lots of folks have considered creating a full fledged java environment. they end up taking sun's and tweaking it. a full blown jvm is just plain hard to do. the gnu folks have been trying it for eons now, and found it was just plain hard to do. all those gui classes really make things challenging.
from what i hear the certification tests are laughable.