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.