What in Hell are Sun playing at with learning JNI ?

Discussion in 'Java' started by Chris Uppal, Jun 26, 2006.

  1. Chris Uppal

    Chris Uppal Guest

    Anyone know what Sun is doing with JNI reference material ?

    There used to be a valuable JNI trail in the Java Tutorial, but it's been
    unreachable for months and is no longer linked to from the main tutorial pages.
    There used to be a copy of Sheng Liang's book on the website too, but all that
    stuff has been replaced by a link to some online bookshop.

    It seems that they don't /want/ people to learn how to program JNI. Are those
    cretins under the impression that the Java libraries are so perfect and
    complete that no one will ever need anything else ?

    At this rate they'll be removing the JNI specification from the next JDK.

    <fume/>

    -- chris
     
    Chris Uppal, Jun 26, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris Uppal

    Guest

    If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    be useful in future....

    Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Thanks ,
    Pradeep


    Chris Uppal wrote:
    > Anyone know what Sun is doing with JNI reference material ?
    >
    > There used to be a valuable JNI trail in the Java Tutorial, but it's been
    > unreachable for months and is no longer linked to from the main tutorial pages.
    > There used to be a copy of Sheng Liang's book on the website too, but all that
    > stuff has been replaced by a link to some online bookshop.
    >
    > It seems that they don't /want/ people to learn how to program JNI. Are those
    > cretins under the impression that the Java libraries are so perfect and
    > complete that no one will ever need anything else ?
    >
    > At this rate they'll be removing the JNI specification from the next JDK.
    >
    > <fume/>
    >
    > -- chris
     
    , Jun 26, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chris Uppal

    Tim Ward Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    > programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    > OS or hardware then ...


    .... the application I'm working on will get rewritten in C++. (Which it
    should have been in the first place; I'm currently having to do bits of it
    in C++ via JNI.)

    --
    Tim Ward
    Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
     
    Tim Ward, Jun 26, 2006
    #3
  4. Chris Uppal

    Chris Smith Guest

    <> wrote:
    > If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    > programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    > OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    > about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    > be useful in future....
    >
    > Please correct me if I'm wrong.


    You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.

    --
    Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer / Technical Trainer
    MindIQ Corporation
     
    Chris Smith, Jun 26, 2006
    #4
  5. On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:16:13 +0100, Chris Uppal wrote:
    > There used to be a copy of Sheng Liang's book on the website too,
    > but all that stuff has been replaced by a link to some online
    > bookshop.


    The book is still online:
    http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jni/index.html

    I've no idea why they've removed the JNI trail from the tutorial
    however.

    /gordon

    --
    [ do not email me copies of your followups ]
    g o r d o n + n e w s @ b a l d e r 1 3 . s e
     
    Gordon Beaton, Jun 28, 2006
    #5
  6. Chris Uppal

    Chris Uppal Guest

    Gordon Beaton wrote:

    [me:]
    > > There used to be a copy of Sheng Liang's book on the website too,
    > > but all that stuff has been replaced by a link to some online
    > > bookshop.

    >
    > The book is still online:
    > http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jni/index.html


    Well, that's something. Thanks.

    Now, for extra credit: find a link /to/ that page from anywhere else in Sun's
    Java documentation ;-)

    -- chris
     
    Chris Uppal, Jun 28, 2006
    #6
  7. On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:56:25 +0100, Chris Uppal wrote:
    > Now, for extra credit: find a link /to/ that page from anywhere else
    > in Sun's Java documentation ;-)


    Start at the J2SE 5.0 documentation, follow the JNI link, then the
    "tips" link to arrive at the "book available" page.

    Follow the link "Code examples in the book can be downloaded here" and
    finally "view HTML".

    /gordon

    --
    [ do not email me copies of your followups ]
    g o r d o n + n e w s @ b a l d e r 1 3 . s e
     
    Gordon Beaton, Jun 28, 2006
    #7
  8. On 28-6-2006 11:56, Chris Uppal wrote:
    > Gordon Beaton wrote:
    >
    > [me:]
    >>> There used to be a copy of Sheng Liang's book on the website too,
    >>> but all that stuff has been replaced by a link to some online
    >>> bookshop.

    >> The book is still online:
    >> http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jni/index.html

    >
    > Well, that's something. Thanks.
    >
    > Now, for extra credit: find a link /to/ that page from anywhere else in Sun's
    > Java documentation ;-)
    >
    > -- chris
    >
    >

    Not too difficult :
    Click on the JNI-"brick" in the JSE diagram
    <http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/>
    ->
    <http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/jni/index.html>
    ->
    <http://java.sun.com/products/jdk/faq/jnifaq.html>
    ->
    <http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jni/>

    You can transfer your credits to my airmiles account ;-)
    --
    Regards,

    Roland
     
    Roland de Ruiter, Jun 28, 2006
    #8
  9. Chris Uppal

    Chris Uppal Guest

    Roland de Ruiter wrote:

    > You can transfer your credits to my airmiles account ;-)


    Do you accept Monopoly money ?

    But thanks, anyway (and to Gordon).

    -- chris
     
    Chris Uppal, Jun 29, 2006
    #9
  10. On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:07:55 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:

    > <> wrote:
    >> If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    >> programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    >> OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    >> about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    >> be useful in future....
    >>
    >> Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    >
    > You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    > that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.


    And yet, people continue to download JBoss.
     
    Owen Jacobson, Jun 30, 2006
    #10
  11. Chris Uppal

    Chris Smith Guest

    Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    > On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:07:55 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    > > <> wrote:
    > >> If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    > >> programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    > >> OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    > >> about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    > >> be useful in future....
    > >>
    > >> Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    > >
    > > You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    > > that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.

    >
    > And yet, people continue to download JBoss.


    Huh?

    --
    Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer / Technical Trainer
    MindIQ Corporation
     
    Chris Smith, Jun 30, 2006
    #11
  12. Chris Uppal

    Danno Guest

    Chris Smith wrote:
    > Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    > > On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:07:55 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    > > > <> wrote:
    > > >> If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    > > >> programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    > > >> OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    > > >> about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    > > >> be useful in future....
    > > >>
    > > >> Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    > > >
    > > > You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    > > > that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.

    > >
    > > And yet, people continue to download JBoss.

    >
    > Huh?
    >


    LMAO!!!!
     
    Danno, Jun 30, 2006
    #12
  13. Chris Uppal

    Chris Smith Guest

    Danno <> wrote:
    >
    > Chris Smith wrote:
    > > Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    > > > And yet, people continue to download JBoss.

    > >
    > > Huh?
    > >

    >
    > LMAO!!!!


    Grow up.

    --
    Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer / Technical Trainer
    MindIQ Corporation
     
    Chris Smith, Jul 1, 2006
    #13
  14. Chris Uppal

    Danno Guest

    Chris Smith wrote:
    > Danno <> wrote:
    > >
    > > Chris Smith wrote:
    > > > Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    > > > > And yet, people continue to download JBoss.
    > > >
    > > > Huh?
    > > >

    > >
    > > LMAO!!!!

    >
    > Grow up.
    >
    > --


    No thanks, the punishments would be more severe if I did. ;)
     
    Danno, Jul 1, 2006
    #14
  15. On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:53:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:

    > Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    >> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:07:55 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    >> > <> wrote:
    >> >> If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    >> >> programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    >> >> OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    >> >> about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    >> >> be useful in future....
    >> >>
    >> >> Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    >> >
    >> > You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    >> > that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.

    >>
    >> And yet, people continue to download JBoss.

    >
    > Huh?


    Nothing serious. I was just venting frustration at our app server, which
    (out of the box) takes almost as long to start as the OS we're running it
    on and provides almost as many services.

    I'm convinced the JBoss people think the JVM needs an OS and they're
    writing one.

    --o
     
    Owen Jacobson, Jul 1, 2006
    #15
  16. Chris Uppal

    Chris Uppal Guest

    Owen Jacobson wrote:

    > I'm convinced the JBoss people think the JVM needs an OS and they're
    > writing one.


    Maybe they should merge with the Emacs people ;-)

    Come to think of it, I'm sure Emacs must have a webserver built-in already --
    but perhaps not yet a full enterprise applications server framework...

    -- chris
     
    Chris Uppal, Jul 1, 2006
    #16
  17. Chris Uppal

    Danno Guest

    Owen Jacobson wrote:
    > On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:53:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    >
    > > Owen Jacobson <> wrote:
    > >> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:07:55 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    > >> > <> wrote:
    > >> >> If an Operating System is developed for the existing JVM and if the
    > >> >> programmer is not allowed to develop program that depends on the native
    > >> >> OS or hardware then I think the application developer need not worry
    > >> >> about the JNI interface. Perhaps this may be the reason why JNI may not
    > >> >> be useful in future....
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    > >> >
    > >> > You're only missing one condition: "and everyone switches over to using
    > >> > that operating system". That last condition is a real woozy, though.
    > >>
    > >> And yet, people continue to download JBoss.

    > >
    > > Huh?

    >
    > Nothing serious. I was just venting frustration at our app server, which
    > (out of the box) takes almost as long to start as the OS we're running it
    > on and provides almost as many services.
    >
    > I'm convinced the JBoss people think the JVM needs an OS and they're
    > writing one.
    >


    What are you doing on JBoss? I get Jboss done and ready in less than
    30 minutes.
     
    Danno, Jul 1, 2006
    #17
  18. Chris Uppal

    Dag Sunde Guest

    Danno wrote:
    > Owen Jacobson wrote:
    >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:53:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    >>

    <snipped/>
    >> I'm convinced the JBoss people think the JVM needs an OS and they're
    >> writing one.
    >>

    >
    > What are you doing on JBoss? I get Jboss done and ready in less than
    > 30 minutes.


    30 minutes?

    What are you running it on? A Sinclair Spectrum?

    ;-)

    --
    Dag.
     
    Dag Sunde, Jul 2, 2006
    #18
  19. Chris Uppal

    Danno Guest

    Dag Sunde wrote:
    > Danno wrote:
    > > Owen Jacobson wrote:
    > >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:53:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
    > >>

    > <snipped/>
    > >> I'm convinced the JBoss people think the JVM needs an OS and they're
    > >> writing one.
    > >>

    > >
    > > What are you doing on JBoss? I get Jboss done and ready in less than
    > > 30 minutes.

    >
    > 30 minutes?
    >
    > What are you running it on? A Sinclair Spectrum?
    >
    > ;-)
    >
    > --


    Haha. The computer is not slow, I am. JBoss runs as is,but I usually
    need to add resources, do some db work, set up an Apache front end,
    lock down the administrative web access. By the time I am done, thirty
    minutes or maybe more has elapsed.
    > Dag.
     
    Danno, Jul 2, 2006
    #19
    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:
    381
    James Cham
    Jul 21, 2003
  2. Roy Benjamin
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    561
    Mike Schilling
    Jul 23, 2003
  3. Alex Hunsley

    IBM's JNI fails where Sun's JNI works

    Alex Hunsley, Nov 3, 2003, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    882
    Alex Hunsley
    Nov 4, 2003
  4. Gordon Beaton

    JNI help - dll hell!!

    Gordon Beaton, Aug 23, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,768
    Chris Uppal
    Aug 24, 2004
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,922
Loading...

Share This Page