[antlr-interest] Re: Managed to compile under .Net !!
tdjastrzebski
tdjastrzebski at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 3 03:07:12 PDT 2003
> Where's the legal stuff saying it CAN'T be compatible?
http://safariexamples.informit.com/0130320722/mslegal/java/settlement.
html
- see section 6(a) and others
They can not even improve performance (!) - section 7(a)iii
Well, you are right. It can be compatible but ... they (MS) would
need a new license for it. Current license does not allow them to go
beyond version 1.1.4 (http://java.sun.com/pr/2001/01/pr010123-
01.html).
I think MS is just afraid that if they continue to develop new
versions compatible with new "official" versions Sun could try to
prove in court that this is still Java but named J#. (J++ was not
named Java too). And they would probably win.
Of course MS could get a new license but I am not sure they actually
could. And right now, I am sure, they do not want to.
Remember, whatever they say this is primary about business and
competition.
> MS is acting like a spoilt brat
Well, I think it is kind of new Sun's point of view, when they want
MS to distribute their VM :) But read their older statements...
Cheers,
Tom Jastrzebski
<Anthony.Youngman at E...> wrote:
> Where's the legal stuff saying it CAN'T be compatible?
>
> The whole legal fuss was over the fact that MS was calling their
stuff
> "Java" when it couldn't pass the certification tests, and was
> *deliberately* making their implementation appear to produce
portable
> code when it was stuffed with Win32 extensions.
>
> As far as I know, there is ABSOLUTELY NO BARRIER to MS including
> Java-compatibility stuff. The two points at issue are that MS is
acting
> like a spoilt brat, and that Sun got an injunction saying that MS
> couldn't call it "Java" unless it could pass the Java-compatibility
> tests (or in other words "don't abuse our trademark").
>
> Cheers,
> Wol.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdjastrzebski [mailto:tdjastrzebski at y...]
> Sent: 02 July 2003 23:10
> To: antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [antlr-interest] Re: Managed to compile under .Net !!
>
>
> > I was also able to use J# to generate Tool.exe file for .NET
> > As Tom mentioned, there was only one change needed, which it
seems
> Microsoft
> > team missed from their java library implementation.
>
> They did not forget. This is a legal issue. J# can be Java
compatible
> up to version 1.1.4 while File.getParentFile() was introduced in
jdk
> 1.2.
> Tom Jastrzebski
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> This transmission is intended for the named recipient only. It may
contain private and confidential information. If this has come to you
in error you must not act on anything disclosed in it, nor must you
copy it, modify it, disseminate it in any way, or show it to anyone.
Please e-mail the sender to inform us of the transmission error or
telephone ECA International immediately and delete the e-mail from
your information system.
>
> Telephone numbers for ECA International offices are: Sydney +61 (0)
2 9911 7799, Hong Kong + 852 2121 2388, London +44 (0)20 7351 5000
and New York +1 212 582 2333.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list