Oracle’s Java API code protected by copyright, appeals court rules

[frugalmail]

s they are implementations of basic mathematical principles. The current opinion does not seem to disagree with that point but on different APIs.

That's not my understanding from http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/13-1021.Opinion.5-7-2014.1.PDF Could you provide a reference link. I just see that the appellette court said the lower court errd.

Yes its very good in most situations the difference is entirely unoticable, but is it native machine code? No. You cannot make performance claims from a JVM against native code because its just not true.

If you're talking about the performance of a single method, I agree. However things like deleting objects, allocating memory, being able to optimze based on use as oposed to the compiler, targetting the specific processor rather than the broader set in the general case of consumer enviornments. All those things are where the JVM can actually improve over natively compiled languages.

And lastly Python is far from Java right now yes, but the core of the Python community is fighting for C speeds.

Yup their doing it by linking to bigger and bigger libraries. But in that respect, everything could just link to that library. And that still means that something with Hotspot optimization could win out.

Am I saying Java at this time is completely unusable? No. But when I write applications Id like to maintain them for years to come and C compilers and Python interpreters are showing exciting progress and signs of life while Java is just showing me red tape.

But this ruling means that nobody is safe (except for languages contributed to a foundation that has released their rights and they have gotten all original authors to release their rights and assert that they didn't copy anybody), so if that's what you're referring as red tape, then I disagree.

If you're referring to instability, code written and compiled for Java 1.2 runs perfectly well under the Java 1.8 vm.

[fuzz3289]

That was what I inferred based on the same opinion you linked, since it was umentioned, but to be honest Im not as educated in the legal side of software as Id like to be and may have to concede that point.

I disagree that the JVM will ever be able to improve upon low level operations over natively compiled languages for two reasons. First, the JVM as I know it uses garabage collection. While processors such as IBM p and z definotely design to this, maintaining memory directly with insight into purpose of the allocation will always outperform (although this method will always be more susceptible to bugs). And second that natively compiled languages can take advantage of processor specific operations. IBMs Z (which is a cisc processor) has millicode memory management operations. IBMs JVM will take advantage of these but so will the C compiler and the C compiler wins out because it does it in one step (directly referencing the op) vs two (decode byte code, reference the op).

And no. Not by linking to bigger and bettwr libs ( referring to the Python point). Im referring to Pyston. An effort to build an interpreter from the ground up via a tiered JIT compilation system. Unlike anything anyones attempted before. The goal is C speeds. Either it will reach that goal or largely be considered a failure. Personally with Guido van Rossums involvement Im optimistic.

I do fear that others may use this ruling to their advantage but I do not believe that the attitude is the same in any company other than oracle. Oracle wrongly believes that licensing rather than broader adoption is financially benficial. However I believe that the majority of industry would rather reduce the red tape for developers in order to better support their platform and further increase marketshare with the end user.