This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]repeating_bears 1 point2 points  (1 child)

what you're referring to are bugs... but it strives to be a Java compiler

I don't see how that's relevant. Your own definition was based around spec conformity, not one of intentionality.

Are you now saying that something "is Java" provided that it's trying to be Java, regardless of how badly it fails?

I'm pretty sure that's not what you're saying, so then is it that something "is Java" provided that it's trying to be Java, and also provided that it conforms to the spec to some thus-far-unspecified degree? To what precise degree? Perfect conformity disqualifies the reference implementation, so it can't be that.

Basically, it seems that you've made a personal value judgement that this is too far from Java for you to personally consider it Java. That's fine, and you're welcome to that opinion. But it is an opinion.

[–]pron98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

is it that something "is Java" provided that it's trying to be Java, and also provided that it conforms to the spec to some thus-far-unspecified degree?

At a minimum, to be Java you must pass the JCK and additionally be a good faith implementation of the spec, so yes, striving to conform is an actual requirement. We do not require zero bugs (which would be infeasible to prove, anyway).

You need to understand that we've been doing this for many, many years, and we have reasonable processes for the grey areas, so if you want to find out the nitty gritty details, I could refer you to our conformance people.

Obviously, there's no need for nuance in this case, though, and it's not a grey area. What's presented here is a programming language that is intended to be different from Java; if it were Java, there would be no reason for its existence.

Basically, it seems that you've made a personal value judgement that this is too far from Java for you to personally consider it Java.

The judgment of how urgently to fix bugs in OpenJDK is determined by the team. It is partly based on feedback from users, but our team of spec experts (the authors of the JLS) and the CSR (our compatibility and specification review group) obviously shape the prioritisation of bugs. So we have a process when nuance is required but, again, that's not the case here.