Re: GCJ with OpenJDK Java API instead of GNU Classpath

Andrew Haley <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> 
> The clause in the OpenJCK6 license which restricts its use to projects
> 'substantially derived' from OpenJDK (judgement of which is made
> secretly by Sun as part of the decision process) makes me very dubious
> about it being a test of the specification.  It's very clearly a test
> of compatibility with the reference implementation provided by Sun and
> only JDKs derived from this reference implementation have ever passed
> it.

I don't believe this to be true, BTW: I know IBM have a clean room
implementation, and I think others do too.

> There are places where the specification is unclear and the TCK will
> resolve them in favour of how Sun chose to interpret the
> specification.

Right.

> I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but let's also not fool
> ourselves that this is all there is to being able to run Java
> applications.

Who would?  This looks like a strawman argument to me.

> For me, keeping the tests a secret and only allowing them to be run
> against approved JDKs just makes me distrust the whole process.  We
> know from our work on GNU Classpath and GCJ that many applications
> can be run without passing the TCK or even having a complete
> implementation of every API imaginable.  Similarly, we know from
> working on IcedTea that there are issues above and beyond the bounds
> of TCK testing.

Of course.

Andrew.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.