71–80 of 156 posts
Dart is a very viable alternative to Java already for Android. See https://flutter.io/ P.S. Dart actually has a Java-to-Dart converter hidden somewhere. I can't find the link, but the static analyzer was ported from Java to Dart using it. Perhaps they could expand that effort?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No Google "fanboy" (I actually hate the term, it's for immature 20 somethings to use), but Google didn't break the Java ecosystem IMHO. The created a whole new language that happens to be mostly based on Java, for a very specific target OS where Java wasn't even available before. The familiarity with Java is merely a bonus and boost for the adoption of Android programming from Java devs. It's wasn't meant (and it isn…
> The created a whole new language that happens to be mostly based on Java That's the "extend" part of "embrace, extend, extinguish."
Extend implies extending an existing X product.
Google made their own runtime, NOT calling it X, and NOT targeting the same platforms where Java was available. And of course this never had any impact on regular Java itself -- so no extinguish part. Nobody stopped using Java on the server or the client even, to use Google's version, because it's not offered at all there.
Their language not only didn't target existing Java deployments, but it was also created (and has always been constrained) for a new platform where Java never existed, and for a usage domain where Java had negligible presence (mobile development in post-iPhone smartphones).
And even if they HAD targeted normal Java deployments, it would have been totally find, and not "embrace, extend, extinguish" if it wasn't called Java. It would have been like MS' C#, not MS' altered Java.
If you don't pretend it's the same product (like MS did), then "embrace, extend, extinguish" is exactly how evolution works in most cases, including the natural one -- things get replicated and some crucial extra sauce is added, and if it's good, then the old things wither.
In fact, in this sense (where you mimic another opponent) "embrace, extend, extinguish" is exactly what projects like OpenOffice, Gnumeric, Gimp, etc intended to do.
But, as said above, this, while also fine, is totally different to what Google did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were JIT-ed for a while. That's what the "optimizing apps" modal dialog after updates is about.
>They were JIT-ed for a while. That's what the "optimizing apps" modal dialog after updates is about I think you meant AOT-ed. The language really doesn't matter though, as long as it can be converted to Dalvik bytecode.
FYI, Oracle is pushing this agenda to squeeze Java shops in other places as well. The tack they are taking is to define any computer that does "one specific thing" as an embedded device and ask you for $300+ per "device", plus some other lofty fees. ( http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/pricing/price-lists/java-... ) So, if you're using Java in a kiosk, ATM, media player, etc, they may be coming for you. My guess is t…
Not knowing when Oracle might decide to shake down your business is a massive incentive to use anything else.
I was thoroughly impressed with the judge who presided over the last ruling -- IIRC he went so far as to learn at least the basics of Java to the point where I remember being impressed by the insight of the questions he posed. There are subsets of law one can specialize in ranging from medical malpractice to obscure patent litigation, but as far as I know there are no factors linking a presiding judge to a specific s…
Many judges probably do, every day, in lots of technically specialized fields, and we're just not paying attention because we're not experts in those fields, either.
Shouldn't assume our field is so much harder for judges to understand than medical, scientific, and other specialized fields judges need to weigh in on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact is that they borked Java compatibility story, regardless how their supporters sell the story. I cannot take whatever piece of Java code I feel like it and run it on Android.
> I cannot take whatever piece of Java code I feel like it and run it on Android. And you weren't meant to. It's a whole different environment, and they made their own language for it, which they happened to base on Java. The didn't call it "Java", nor they targeted regular Java deployments (like MS did). They just wanted to have something that looks familiar to lots of devs, but for THEIR platform. If MS had done th…
> Android provides a rich application framework that allows you to build innovative apps and games for mobile devices in a Java language environment.
In order to compile for Android, you use JACK, the Java Android Compiler Kit.[2] I could go on. Google uses the name Java all the time in reference to the language used for Android.
Google didn't base a language off Java. Android uses Java-the-language, unmodified (and an outdated one at that). It uses some existing Java APIs as well, and keeps the same names, which is why the official Android API reference[3] has the word Java appearing more times in it than a history of Indonesia.
[1] http://developer.android.com/guide/index.html [2] https://source.android.com/source/jack.html [3] http://developer.android.com/reference/java/lang/package-sum...
:-)