Red Hat Plans Open Source Java 422
sthiyaga writes "According to a ComputerWire article, Red Hat is in discussions with Sun about launching an open source version of the Java platform. 'There's always been an interest in an open source implementation of Java developed in a clean room that adheres to the Java standards,' Szulik told ComputerWire. 'We're in discussions with Sun. We'd like to do this with their support.'"
Gosling favors Open-Source Java (Score:5, Informative)
Some people withing Sun seem to be scared though that an Open-Source Java standard could be "polluted" by Microsoft.
There (Score:5, Informative)
What was Blackdown? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Much needed (Score:3, Informative)
This reference of
Again, I'm probably talking out of my arse, though...
Sun's Jonathan Schwartz Opposes Open Source Java (Score:4, Informative)
Should Java be made fully open-source? The problem with open-source is that [victory] goes to volume, and that's evident in the Linux community today where ISVs [independent software vendors] are qualifying to Red Hat and abandoning everyone else. Why? Because Red Hat has volume. If Java were open-source, Microsoft could take it, deliver it as they saw fit and drive a definition of Java that was divergent from the one that the community wanted to be compatible. And to the victor would go the spoils of that nefarious action. To the extraordinary credit of the Java Community Process [JCP], we have a uniform compatible standard that now spans hundreds of millions of devices, hundreds of millions of smart cards, hundreds of millions of desktops and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of servers. So you have to really be careful in understanding the distinction between open-source and open standards.
More at http://www.computerworld.com/developmenttopics/de
Re:What was Blackdown? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Native Java (Score:5, Informative)
Re:There (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Blackdown? (Score:3, Informative)
A bridge between the open source community and the commercial software development world... [blackdown.org]
So apparently not Open Source.
Re:What was Blackdown? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Much needed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Much needed (Score:2, Informative)
.NET is MS's latest development platform.
At it's heart it is meant to be a way for various programming languages and protocols to communicate with each other and work together.
The main problem is (of course) that to truly become platform independant MS would have to release a large amount of the code that runs it.
Microsft'sA reason to enlist Sun's Cooperation (Score:5, Informative)
oh boy, here we go... (Score:5, Informative)
I suspect Microsoft will tolerate dotGNU, Mono, as long as they see it beneficial to do so. Also, the language and runtime is not much. The true power of .NET and Java is in the wide amount of libraries available to these languages. I really wish the Mono team good like to replicating that in a source compatible manner. It would be no small feat.
Re:Gosling favors Open-Source Java (Score:3, Informative)
The Sun v. MicroSoft case was based on MS shipping a "Java" environment which did not follow the standard to Sun's satisfaction. The copyright on the environment was never in question: it belonged to MicroSoft.
If there's a GPL Java environment, you can only call it "Java(tm)" if it has not been changed such that it fails to follow the standard. This would most likely mean that extensions remain internal to a given project, or are reference implementations or research for proposed modifications to the standard, etc.; on the other hand, you're perfectly free to port it to a different platform, change implementation details, add your new optimization, and so forth. You could also change things that the standard leaves to the implementation to decide (like command-line options to the tools).
Re: Much needed (Score:2, Informative)
I thought there were already open source java's out there...
I guess Blackdown [blackdown.org] and Kaffe [kaffe.org] are mirages.
Re:Gosling favors Open-Source Java (Score:3, Informative)
Newsflash: Sun has plenty of patents on key aspects of Java APIs and the JVM (check the uspto site).
No, it's more likely GCJ (Score:4, Informative)
My guess (as original "inventor" of GCJ, but no longer associated with Red Hat except as share holder): To the extent that Sun is willing to open-source parts of JDK, they'll use that; if Sun is unwilling, they will use GCJ.
If you don't like swing... (Score:5, Informative)
Some info:
The Eclipse project [eclipse.org] (of which SWT is a part of)
SWT Guide (good intro to SWT) [eclipse.org]
SWT API Specification [eclipse.org]
SWT Articles (many regarding topics internal to the API) [eclipse.org] -- scroll down to SWT
Re:No, it's more likely GCJ (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. The program gcj is a compiler, like javac, but the GCJ project and run-time includes a virtual machine. The command gij is a plug-in replacement for the java command (except for unimplemented features and bugs, of course).
Re:Hey troll/Tool Of The Man (tm) (Score:3, Informative)
And, it's not a puppet body like some other bodies you might be able to think of.
Dude, pass me that crack. ECMA [ecma-international.org] and ISO [iso.org] have way more credibility than JCP. ISO is the standards organization.
However... (Score:2, Informative)
There are already real, working Java implementations from third parties like GCJ and IBM's VM, which have been around for a while... Mono has not really been around long enough to see if they have really escaped a patent trap.
Re:Much needed (Score:2, Informative)
The
The
Re:Native Java (Score:3, Informative)
The whole point of Swing was to eliminate native peers - all Swing needs is a 2D frame buffer. In theory, you could have a very broken AWT native peer implementation and Swing would be just fine.
Personally, I think SWT is a good alternative - and it already works with gcj.
The rest of your post is basically a non-sequitor.
Re:Gosling favors Open-Source Java (Score:2, Informative)
Admittedly, it not released under an approved open source license, but it is not correct to say that you are unable to examine the source.
Re:Hey troll/Tool Of The Man (tm) (Score:3, Informative)
What's the use of the ECMA standard, really? Perhaps the fact that Mono has to use Wine is not a good enough reality check for you?
Re:Much needed (Score:5, Informative)
vs 47.3 on my workstation). And it does more stuff -- a lot of the add-on packages for Java, including all of their J2EE crap, parellels
I am guessing you are stating that Java has more stuff since
CD is trivial, and most Windows Update and XP users have it already.
I have XP and had to download the
What's cool about
This is covered by JDO in Java. Theres also a really nice opensource reporting library call JasperReports. Along with that theres iReports which is an opensource IDE for creating JasperReports.
3)
- It has a much faster graphics interface, while maintaining a robust graphics toolkit.
See the SWT project. It uses native graphics rendering and widgets in Java.
- It interoperates quickly and pretty thoroughly with current COM APIs, and wraps up nicely for use in non-.NET apps
SWT has OLE/ActiveX support.
- The Studio environment is faster to work with and has a more mature debugger than any Java IDE I've seen, including Netbeans
Eclipse project works real well. Its very fast (again, uses SWT to render widgets) and has a very mature debugger.
- ADO.NET is pretty nicely done, and things like DataAdapters parellel structures I always end up writing in Java anyway.
Its JDO in Java world.
Anyway, the runtime filesize argument is just crap. The java guys need to get that GUI speed up to par or
Yes, check out Eclipse (www.eclipse.org). I have been using SWT in combination with GCJ to create native windows applications that dust anything created in VB (though C/C++ apps are a couple milliseconds quicker).
Eight months ago I'd have never said this, but Java isn't my favorite language anymore. C# is.
I liked
And even association with the vile and repugnant Microsoft isn't enough to sour it.
I think both Microsoft and Sun suck at being at the helm of both languages. Borland does a better job with C/C++ over Microsoft and IBM does better work with Java compared to Sun.
Re:RedHat should make better use of their time (Score:2, Informative)
1. FUTEX - a fast user-mode mutex. In the likely (hopefully) usual case no context switch happens when you get a futex. This can be a big win under certain synchronization loads. Imagine grabbing a futex in 15 clks vs 1,500 - 6,000 clks (these numbers may be slightly off and will vary quite a bit between machines, glibc and linux kernel versions)
2. NPTL - the New Posix Threading Library - a great improvement in both Posix compliance, performance, latency, and in the maximum number of usable threads. Ingo (one of the authors) announced the creation and destruction of 100,000 threads in one second. This is available in RedHat 9. (I don't know if futexes are available in the RedHat 9 kernel yet).
3. Graphics - Hey, I'm a Linux/Java fan and I'd like to be able to agree with you here but no. Doing a search in Sun's Java bug list will show up a lot of bugs in Linux graphics performance. In fact, check out http://www.javagaming.org/ and browse some of the posts there about it. There are tons of benchmarks of actual games that get 1/10 of the video throughput under Linux vs Win32. Sorry. (BTW, it seems the Blackdown folks are claiming an 80% 2D speedup in their latest port. I haven't tried it yet but it may help).
4. About ALSA - it rocks! What I meant to say was that perhaps RedHat could help the ALSA project support more cards and remove the completely stunned ARTS/ESD/etc... hacks and replace them with the proper ALSA DMIX plugin. This would allow multiple
(JDK 1.4.2-beta already has ALSA and DMIX support BTW - comments welcome on how well it works).
Re:Native Java (Score:3, Informative)
Most of Swing, yes. The exceptions are the top-level containers (JFrame, JDialog, JWindow and JApplet) which extend the AWT components.
Re:Much needed (Score:3, Informative)
So with delegates they are bad because a programmer could write unclear code by putting the delegated function definition well away from where the delegate is initalised? This is as compared to the horrible unreadable code you'll find if you put "anonymous inner class java" into google. If you had to create 10 such inner classes would you advocate putting this code all in one initialisation function (such that it is very big), or would you create 10 seperate initialiser functions that the first calls (such that the code that calls the initialisers is possible pages away from the actual code of the initialiser)?
You'd write ten inner classes if you must.
And anonymous inner classes prevent this how? Oh. They dont.
They prevent it because the handling code is in a seperate distinct module (a class).
Give it up mate. Java is an old, hacked, bungled, proprietary language from a monopolistic company. If there's going to be an open source language, get behind Mono, and make open source
I'm working on both mono and pnet.