Re: Java Certification

["james_williams at optusnet dot com dot au" <james_williams at optusnet dot com dot au>]

Why doesn't the GCJ team design a new language that maps closely to java (like 
microsoft did with C#) and create their own framework.   The new language 
could be called "G"  or a more stylized "X"  and you guys would be free to 
innovate your own framework on top of all of the innovation that you have 
already done.   It seems to me that certification is holding back this 
project.  If you were your own language (which would be more attractive to 
the open source and increasingly non-open source community) then you would 
have your freedom, which seems to be the purpose of the venture anyway.

I say go for it.   

could it be possible to fork the project and do both?

I'd help any way I could.

James


Andrew wrote:
 > 
 > > Philippe> and in addition, several other issues make GCJ as a whole
 > > Philippe> unsuitable for my purposes. It comes down to requiring
 > > Philippe> certification.
 > >
 > > The fact is, we'll probably never get certification.  Despite
 > > occasional press releases to the contrary, Sun keeps a tight grip on
 > > the JCK.

[ ... ]

 > Then, I tell [Rob Gingell] that comprehensive test suite is essentially
 > important for quality of Java processing systems. In fact, the JCK
 > (J2SE TCK?) is the only test suite which can ensure that Java systems
 > have achieved producttion quality.  We, developers of Java systems
 > including JVM, JIT, Java compilers and so on, hope to access the JCK
 > eagerly.
 > 
 > He answered that it is not difficult to loosen the conditions of the
 > JCK and he has not just tried yet.  I was pleased but we have not been
 > able to see any change on the JCK so far.

We've heard several times before that the JCK will be opened, but it
hasn't happened.  We're now at the point where we won't believe
anything that we don't see.  We're going to press on regardless,
developing our test framework and using others like Jacks.

Andrew.