3 ms·
Yes, that is more or less the goal - with the major difference being cross-industry collaboration - every major player is included and even the community has it
by emteycz 5y ago
Yes, that is more or less the goal - with the major difference being cross-industry collaboration - every major player is included and even the community has its word.
- kaba0 5y agoHow is the JEP process not cross-industry collaboration with a significant community voice?
- k__ 5y agoDidn't the Harmony disaster show that Java is a garbage fire?
- kaba0 5y agoIf you mean the Oracle v Google fiasco, it was a legal battle on whether it is legal to copy a significant part but not exactly the whole of what is called JavaTM. But Java is one of the few major languages that is standard-specified, not specified by the reference implementation, the reference impl. is completely open source, and the ecosystem is blooming. So, no? It is a huge platform running a very very significant chunk of all the backend servers.
- emteycz 5y agoExactly - while Wasm is meant to be much lighter and free of backwards compatibility, and thus hopefully actually safe
- kaba0 5y agoIf it is actually free of backwards compatibility, then it will be instantly abandonware. I think you meant to write that it is new and shiny so it doesn’t yet have a need to decide between breaking change or backwards compatibility, but it will happen. We’ll see how they handle it. And safety has nothing to do with backwards compatibility, and the JVM is not unsafe at all against the attack vectors it is planned for.
- emteycz 5y agoOk, why do you care anyways though? Java on the web failed, Wasm might too, but we won't know without trying. It's not the same thing, there are many differences especially in relation to lessons learned from Java and past 15 years of the web platform.