From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 16:43:56 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

But J2SE was available in an open-source form, namely OpenJDK. So
they adapted that instead.

With respect, I think you may have gotten this wrong. Originally
they used Apache Harmony (presumably they preferred its non-copyleft
licensing) but switched to OpenJDK in 02016 in response to the
Oracle lawsuit
<https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/android-n-switches-to-openjdk-google-tells-oracle-it-is-protected-by-the-gpl/>

You are mixing up the language implementation with the library implementation.

Your statement, rCLSo [the Android team] adapted [OpenJDK] instead [when
they could have chosen J2ME],rCY is not true of *either* the language implementation (Dalvik) *or* the library implementation (initially they
adapted Harmony, and many years later they adapted OpenJDK).

Kragen
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 20:27:04 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 16:43:56 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

But J2SE was available in an open-source form, namely OpenJDK. So
they adapted that instead.

With respect, I think you may have gotten this wrong. Originally
they used Apache Harmony (presumably they preferred its non-copyleft
licensing) but switched to OpenJDK in 02016 in response to the
Oracle lawsuit
<https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/android-n-switches-to-openjdk-google-tells-oracle-it-is-protected-by-the-gpl/>

You are mixing up the language implementation with the library
implementation.

Your statement, rCLSo [the Android team] adapted [OpenJDK] instead [when
they could have chosen J2ME],rCY is not true of *either* the language implementation (Dalvik) *or* the library implementation (initially they adapted Harmony, and many years later they adapted OpenJDK).

rCLDalvikrCY was the original bytecode interpreter that Google came up
with for Android. That was not a rCLlanguage implementationrCY for any particular rCLlanguagerCY.

By rCLlanguage implementationrCY I was talking about SunJDK versus
OpenJDK.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 20:27:04 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:

Your statement, rCLSo [the Android team] adapted [OpenJDK] instead [when
they could have chosen J2ME],rCY is not true of *either* the language
implementation (Dalvik) *or* the library implementation (initially they
adapted Harmony, and many years later they adapted OpenJDK).

rCLDalvikrCY was the original bytecode interpreter that Google came up
with for Android. That was not a rCLlanguage implementationrCY for any particular rCLlanguagerCY.

By rCLlanguage implementationrCY I was talking about SunJDK versus
OpenJDK.

We've agreed that they werenrCOt using the Sun JDKrCOs class library;
instead they used Apache Harmony. We've agreed that they werenrCOt using
the Sun JDKrCOs bytecode interpreter; instead they used Dalvik. I'm
pretty sure they werenrCOt using the Sun JDKrCOs compiler from Java source
to Java bytecode, because Dalvik couldnrCOt interpret the standard stack-oriented JVM bytecode. Was there some other part of the Sun JDK
that they *were* using? If so, what part? What does the JDK contain,
other than the class library, the virtual machine, and the compiler to
that virtual machine?

Kragen
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 15:24:51 -0300, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:

I'm pretty sure they werenrCOt using the Sun JDKrCOs compiler from Java source to Java bytecode, because Dalvik couldnrCOt interpret the
standard stack-oriented JVM bytecode.

The whole point about using SunrCOs JDK was precisely to get its
compiler.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2