4 ms·
"After all, before OpenJDK, GCJ and lots of other free Java implementations released fine without TCK." GCJ is old... and OpenJDK does have access to the TCK I
by hugh4life 16y ago
"After all, before OpenJDK, GCJ and lots of other free Java implementations released fine without TCK."
GCJ is old... and OpenJDK does have access to the TCK IIRC...
- sanxiyn 16y agoGCJ is old, but is there any other implementation that can compile to native code? (Mainly good for simplifying distribution and better interfacing with native code instead of JNI.)
- hugh4life 16y agoExcelsior JET... is an AOT compiler... http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jet.html http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jet.html It is licensed...
- koenigdavidmj 16y agoIf I recall correctly, GCJ's `compiling to native code' really means `slapping a bytecode interpreter and your bytecode in the same file, and calling it an executable'.
- rmathew 16y agoThis is not correct at all. It generates actual native code from Java source files or byte-code.
- bad_user 16y ago> OpenJDK does have access to the TCK Of course it does, access to the TCK was always at Sun's discretion to give. OpenJDK doesn't matter, Java is not free to be implemented by open-source projects (even though JSR 270 explicitly says so) because the TCK licensing prohibits it. It is also irrelevant if GCJ is old, patents don't have a "use it or you'll lose it" clause as trademarks do.