Re: OMG Oracle/Sun ... out of the loop developer panicking

Discussion in 'Java' started by Steve Sobol, Feb 27, 2010.

  1. Steve Sobol

    Steve Sobol Guest

    In article <>, Duncan.Idaho2008
    @googlemail.com says...
    >
    > Oh my goodness what has been happening.
    >
    > I've been 'out of the loop' since before Christmas 2009. Just got back
    > to the UK and found an email in my inbox from Oracle telling me they've
    > bought Sun ... catastrophe ... or is it.
    >
    > Can anyone point me to any discussion groups ... I need to figure out
    > what this means to my huge (many years) time investment in Java.
    >
    > Thanks now where's the scotch, think I need a drink.
    >
    > Idaho


    Really, aside from the fact that Larry Ellison is an arrogant jerkoff
    who thinks all of his products are perfect... remember his marketing
    campaign from a few years back? "Can't break it. Can't break in" while
    people were actively finding exploits in his database software...

    Aside from that, as other people have mentioned, Sun is a good fit for
    Oracle.

    I would have been OK with IBM buying them too, as IBM also has invested
    heavily in Java, and has contributed a fair amount of code back to the
    community.

    As long as Microsoft didn't buy them, I'm not going to worry too much.


    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, California, USA
    Steve Sobol, Feb 27, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Steve Sobol" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>, Duncan.Idaho2008
    > @googlemail.com says...
    >>
    >> Oh my goodness what has been happening.
    >>
    >> I've been 'out of the loop' since before Christmas 2009. Just got back
    >> to the UK and found an email in my inbox from Oracle telling me they've
    >> bought Sun ... catastrophe ... or is it.
    >>
    >> Can anyone point me to any discussion groups ... I need to figure out
    >> what this means to my huge (many years) time investment in Java.
    >>
    >> Thanks now where's the scotch, think I need a drink.
    >>
    >> Idaho

    >
    > Really, aside from the fact that Larry Ellison is an arrogant jerkoff
    > who thinks all of his products are perfect... remember his marketing
    > campaign from a few years back? "Can't break it. Can't break in" while
    > people were actively finding exploits in his database software...
    >
    > Aside from that, as other people have mentioned, Sun is a good fit for
    > Oracle.
    >
    > I would have been OK with IBM buying them too, as IBM also has invested
    > heavily in Java, and has contributed a fair amount of code back to the
    > community.
    >
    > As long as Microsoft didn't buy them, I'm not going to worry too much.
    >


    but, they could buy Sun and them provide a "clean migration path" to the
    "vastly superior" .NET Framework... (and while they are at it, deprecate
    future support for non-Windows OS's, non-PE/COFF binary code, ...).

    or such...
    BGB / cr88192, Feb 28, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Steve Sobol

    Lew Guest

    DuncanIdaho wrote:
    > Well. thank's for all your comments. I've always used the development
    > kits available from the apparently now defunct http://java.sun.com which


    By what stretch of the imagination can you describe that site as defunct?

    > now appears as an Oracle branded web site.


    Isn't "now appears" the exact opposite of "defunct"? Isn't the presence of
    material timestamped within the last few days countervailing evidence?
    Announcements of upcoming events likewise?

    In fact, the presence of the Oracle brand on the site is /prima facie/
    evidence that it isn't defunct.

    Perhaps you use a different dictionary from the rest of us?

    --
    Lew
    Lew, Feb 28, 2010
    #3
  4. Steve Sobol

    Tom Anderson Guest

    On Sun, 28 Feb 2010, Lew wrote:

    > DuncanIdaho wrote:
    >> Well. thank's for all your comments. I've always used the development kits
    >> available from the apparently now defunct http://java.sun.com which

    >
    > By what stretch of the imagination can you describe that site as defunct?
    >
    >> now appears as an Oracle branded web site.

    >
    > Isn't "now appears" the exact opposite of "defunct"? Isn't the presence of
    > material timestamped within the last few days countervailing evidence?
    > Announcements of upcoming events likewise?
    >
    > In fact, the presence of the Oracle brand on the site is /prima facie/
    > evidence that it isn't defunct.
    >
    > Perhaps you use a different dictionary from the rest of us?


    Maybe he meant it was "da funk"?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUIBJ_jYTU

    tom

    --
    Standing on the shoulders of Google
    Tom Anderson, Feb 28, 2010
    #4
  5. Steve Sobol

    Lew Guest

    Lew wrote:
    >> Perhaps you use a different dictionary from the rest of us?


    DuncanIdaho wrote:
    > Ah, the dictionary man, hello again, well thanks for putting me
    > straight. Unlike you however I don't spend my time with my head up my
    > ... er, in a dictionary. My wife thinks you may have a little too much
    > time on your hands, I think she may be right.


    That's not what she told me last night at the motel.

    > Very funny though, most amusing.


    Can't refute the point, so you attack the man?

    --
    Lew
    Lew, Feb 28, 2010
    #5
  6. Steve Sobol

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 28-02-2010 15:19, DuncanIdaho wrote:
    > Well. thank's for all your comments. I've always used the development
    > kits available from the apparently now defunct http://java.sun.com which
    > now appears as an Oracle branded web site.


    Ofcourse.

    When Oracle buys SUN then they obviously rebrand all the SUN web sites,

    That is to be expected.

    > Anyway as for IBM, I remember using some
    > ghastly piece of IBM IDE nastiness whose name I have expunged from my
    > memory forever. It was an explosion of green and grey with millions of
    > windows and the most appalling spaghetti code nonsense you ever have
    > seen ...


    Visual Age for Java 3.5 and 4.0 is on the top-10-hate-list of
    many developers.

    > and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself


    It is not that bad.

    You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 28, 2010
    #6
  7. Arne Vajhøj wrote:
    >> and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself

    >
    > It is not that bad.
    >
    > You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.


    Very, very familiar.
    Mike Schilling, Mar 1, 2010
    #7
  8. "Arne Vajhøj" <> wrote in message
    news:4b8afff4$0$272$...
    > On 28-02-2010 15:19, DuncanIdaho wrote:
    >> Well. thank's for all your comments. I've always used the development
    >> kits available from the apparently now defunct http://java.sun.com which
    >> now appears as an Oracle branded web site.

    >
    > Ofcourse.
    >
    > When Oracle buys SUN then they obviously rebrand all the SUN web sites,
    >
    > That is to be expected.
    >


    yep.


    > > Anyway as for IBM, I remember using some
    >> ghastly piece of IBM IDE nastiness whose name I have expunged from my
    >> memory forever. It was an explosion of green and grey with millions of
    >> windows and the most appalling spaghetti code nonsense you ever have
    >> seen ...

    >
    > Visual Age for Java 3.5 and 4.0 is on the top-10-hate-list of
    > many developers.
    >


    can't claim any personal experience with this one...


    > > and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself

    >
    > It is not that bad.
    >
    > You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.
    >


    agreed.

    actually, MS's tools and basic technology are fairly well polished.


    Visual Studio works fairly well (although, for other reasons, it doesn't
    entirely sway me from my primary use of Makefile's for building code...).

    similarly, C# is a fairly capable language (and not that much different from
    Java in many respects), and at well, C and C++ can also work on .NET
    (although one does have to force the C into pretending to be C++, but this
    is not too big of an issue...).

    CIL (AKA: MSIL) is also a fairly capable bytecode, as it can also directly
    handle C and C++, as well as C#, J#, VB, ...

    also, C++ on .NET (C++/CLI) is also capable of fairly directly accessing
    code and data in native land (no need for something like JNI or JNA).

    technically, CIL is actually a bit more capable and powerful than JBC (JBC
    is not particularly well suited to languages which are not Java...).
    granted, some non-Java languages have used JBC, but generally not cleanly
    (hacks are often needed), and a language like C or C++ can't be run directly
    (it has to be "faked" in many ways). CIL is, however, directly capable of
    representing C or C++ semantics (raw pointers, function pointers, ...) at
    the IL level.


    but, what of the cost?:
    between them, CIL is very much more complex, and its binary-representation
    (as a hacked-over PE/COFF image with something vaguely similar to a
    relational-database thrown in the mix), is generally somewhat ugly and
    difficult to work with (difficult to load, difficult to process, metadata
    has an inconvinient layout and is not really easy to convert, ...).

    similarly, there are not any particularly good alternative implementations
    (many alternative implementations exist of Java, but very few of .NET, and
    those which do exist are generally fairly poor...).


    but, I have gone and tried to make a VM which can deal with both JBC and CIL
    (as well, it has its own internal IL as well, of a vaguely similar style to
    JBC and CIL, but this IL is not particularly well suited for anything not
    C...).

    in general, the VM tries to share most of the internal machinery (mostly by
    me trying to keep everything modular and general-purpose), ...


    recently, I had also been trying to write my own implementation of the Java
    class library, so I can have one I can put under public domain, but then I
    am faced with what would seem to be the apparent task of writing a mountain
    of boilerplate (my experience thus far has been writing lots of code which
    seems to do relatively little, I have little idea why so many classes and
    methods are needed for all this stuff...).

    granted, I may be missing something here, as I primarily code in languages
    which are not Java...

    or such...



    > Arne
    BGB / cr88192, Mar 1, 2010
    #8
  9. Steve Sobol

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 28-02-2010 20:07, BGB / cr88192 wrote:
    > "Arne Vajhøj"<> wrote in message
    > news:4b8afff4$0$272$...
    >> On 28-02-2010 15:19, DuncanIdaho wrote:
    >>> Anyway as for IBM, I remember using some
    >>> ghastly piece of IBM IDE nastiness whose name I have expunged from my
    >>> memory forever. It was an explosion of green and grey with millions of
    >>> windows and the most appalling spaghetti code nonsense you ever have
    >>> seen ...

    >>
    >> Visual Age for Java 3.5 and 4.0 is on the top-10-hate-list of
    >> many developers.
    >>

    >
    > can't claim any personal experience with this one...


    Consider yourself lucky.

    >>> and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself

    >>
    >> It is not that bad.
    >>
    >> You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.

    >
    > agreed.
    >
    > actually, MS's tools and basic technology are fairly well polished.

    ....
    > but, what of the cost?:
    > between them, CIL is very much more complex, and its binary-representation
    > (as a hacked-over PE/COFF image with something vaguely similar to a
    > relational-database thrown in the mix), is generally somewhat ugly and
    > difficult to work with (difficult to load, difficult to process, metadata
    > has an inconvinient layout and is not really easy to convert, ...).


    That is not a problem for those writing apps.

    > similarly, there are not any particularly good alternative implementations
    > (many alternative implementations exist of Java, but very few of .NET, and
    > those which do exist are generally fairly poor...).


    Mono is not that bad today.

    > but, I have gone and tried to make a VM which can deal with both JBC and CIL
    > (as well, it has its own internal IL as well, of a vaguely similar style to
    > JBC and CIL, but this IL is not particularly well suited for anything not
    > C...).


    IKVM can run Java byte code in .NET CLR.

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Mar 1, 2010
    #9
  10. "Arne Vajhøj" <> wrote in message
    news:4b8b366e$0$285$...
    > On 28-02-2010 20:07, BGB / cr88192 wrote:
    >> "Arne Vajhøj"<> wrote in message
    >> news:4b8afff4$0$272$...
    >>> On 28-02-2010 15:19, DuncanIdaho wrote:
    >>>> Anyway as for IBM, I remember using some
    >>>> ghastly piece of IBM IDE nastiness whose name I have expunged from my
    >>>> memory forever. It was an explosion of green and grey with millions of
    >>>> windows and the most appalling spaghetti code nonsense you ever have
    >>>> seen ...
    >>>
    >>> Visual Age for Java 3.5 and 4.0 is on the top-10-hate-list of
    >>> many developers.
    >>>

    >>
    >> can't claim any personal experience with this one...

    >
    > Consider yourself lucky.
    >


    yep...


    >>>> and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself
    >>>
    >>> It is not that bad.
    >>>
    >>> You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.

    >>
    >> agreed.
    >>
    >> actually, MS's tools and basic technology are fairly well polished.

    > ...
    >> but, what of the cost?:
    >> between them, CIL is very much more complex, and its
    >> binary-representation
    >> (as a hacked-over PE/COFF image with something vaguely similar to a
    >> relational-database thrown in the mix), is generally somewhat ugly and
    >> difficult to work with (difficult to load, difficult to process, metadata
    >> has an inconvinient layout and is not really easy to convert, ...).

    >
    > That is not a problem for those writing apps.
    >


    granted, but it does matter some for VM writers, which in turn matters for
    them being a variety of free implementations...

    more implementations means more options and more choice, as well as the
    ability to mix and match parts to find a particular combination best suited
    to ones' particular needs, ...


    but, I know of some of its issues, having gone through the experience of
    writing a loader, ...


    >> similarly, there are not any particularly good alternative
    >> implementations
    >> (many alternative implementations exist of Java, but very few of .NET,
    >> and
    >> those which do exist are generally fairly poor...).

    >
    > Mono is not that bad today.
    >


    doesn't work nearly as well on Windows though, and I couldn't get it to
    rebuild from sources on Windows...

    also it is GPL and the code isn't exactly clean (logic from unrelated
    components is tangled together, there would not seem to be any clean "layers
    of abstraction" or clearly separated subsystems, ...), which can also be
    detractors...

    similarly, I think there is little chance of it building with MSVC.

    otherwise, granted, it is a good option (it works well on Linux, and on
    Windows there is MS's implementation).


    >> but, I have gone and tried to make a VM which can deal with both JBC and
    >> CIL
    >> (as well, it has its own internal IL as well, of a vaguely similar style
    >> to
    >> JBC and CIL, but this IL is not particularly well suited for anything not
    >> C...).

    >
    > IKVM can run Java byte code in .NET CLR.
    >


    granted...


    my VM originally did neither (it was originally written so that I could have
    eval and dynamic script loading with C), but I started adding support for
    both later on (although on both fronts progress is slow).

    oddly, one of the most heavily-used languages in the project thus far is
    ending up being ASM, mostly because the assembler happens to generate code
    faster much than my C compiler, and is more generally usable than my
    JavaScript-like language (but at the cost of the ASM being target specific,
    which is a bit lame).

    so, ASM is used in many of the places where ideally eval would have come in
    handy...
    (ASM is also used by the JIT backends and similar, ...).
    (note: dynamic linking is done by a linker, which generally accepts COFF
    objects, typically produced by the assembler, where both x86 and x86-64 COFF
    objects are supported).


    many of the parts were designed after other commonly-used components,
    although some parts have ended up being mash-ups of different
    vaguely-related pieces of technology (and are thus unorthodox in this
    respect).

    for example, metadata is managed by a DB resembling the "Windows Registry"
    and with a signature-system based on a mash-up of JVM-signature strings and
    the IA64-ABI (and when encoded in symbol names, use JNI-style mangling...).
    errm, I based the DB on the Registry as this seemed to be easiest to
    implement.


    admitted, at this point in time the project is not likely to really be
    useful to anyone besides myself...
    I guess it is a reasearch project of sorts, but I am the only person
    involved...


    or such...
    BGB / cr88192, Mar 1, 2010
    #10
  11. "Mike Schilling" <> wrote in message
    news:hmf407$dbd$-september.org...
    > Arne Vajhøj wrote:
    >>> and if I ever had to 'migrate' to .NET I think I'd drown myself

    >>
    >> It is not that bad.
    >>
    >> You will find a lot of the stuff very familiar.

    >
    > Very, very familiar.


    depends where one looks and how deeply one digs...

    things similar:
    the C# language design, overall structure, ...

    MSIL/CIL bytecode (both use 0xFE for multi-byte opcodes, ...), but the names
    and numbers of the opcodes is different (although a few are similar);
    both JBC and MSIL are based on stack machines;
    ....

    things different:
    namespaces vs packages;
    PE/COFF vs JAR and class-files;
    metadata format is very different (a big multiple table based structure
    rather than a flat array of assorted entries of various types, differences
    in overall organization, ...);
    there are differences in the validation rules;
    ....


    although, granted, there is much more in common between them than, say,
    between either of them and native-code...

    actually, granted, one can sort of think that maybe MSIL is like what one
    would get if one tried combining together a lot of the mechanics from
    something like the JVM with a lot of parts from a native-code C or C++
    compiler or similar...

    actually, thinking about it as JVM + C++ compiler seems to make a fair
    amount of sense WRT the overall design, at several different levels. it is
    possible that they could be related somehow...


    or such...
    BGB / cr88192, Mar 1, 2010
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. James Cham
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    368
    James Cham
    Jul 21, 2003
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,868
  3. Robert Klemme
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    444
  4. BGB / cr88192
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    466
    BGB / cr88192
    Feb 28, 2010
  5. Isaac Won
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    370
    Ulrich Eckhardt
    Mar 4, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page