Content deleted Content added
→remove bounds checking: new section |
Prosfilaes (talk | contribs) →Copyrights and patents: new section |
||
Line 672:
It is said that "HotSpot can remove bounds checking". But as far as I understand it's only an optimization technique which sometimes remove bound checking but not suppress it totally. [[User:Xavier Combelle|Xavier Combelle]] ([[User talk:Xavier Combelle|talk]]) 17:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
== Copyrights and patents ==
If we're going to say that "Various aspects of the language are covered by patents and copyrights held by Oracle.", then we need a cite to back it up. [[Oracle_v._Google]] says the opposite, that provided they avoid copying code, Google can implement Java (and all its APIs) even over Oracle's objections. http://www.javaworld.com/jw-10-1997/jw-10-lawsuit.html says "the complaint charges Microsoft with trademark infringement, false advertising, breach of contract, unfair competition, interference with prospective economic advantage, and inducing breach of contract." That long list does not include copyrights or patents. If we're wildly speculating, http://communities.mentor.com/community/cs/archives/cxx-abi-dev/msg01295.html is a list of possible patents over C++ implementations (not really from a reliable source) and if GCC's C++ implementation violates any of them, so almost certainly does GCC's Java implementation, as they share an ABI... and IBM and Microsoft are the corporate names on those patents, not Oracle.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|talk]]) 08:24, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
| |||