|
|
|
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 12:06 AM EDT |
| [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ed L. on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 12:18 AM EDT |
| Your concerns are shared. I have no problems with the good judge asking all the
questions he wants until he gets it right. My problem is he may feel pressure to
decide the matter before end the damages phase, when it may be an issue to merit
several months careful deliberation, and many more
questions.
---
Real Programmers mangle their own memory. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 01:07 AM EDT |
I'm more worried that everyone is confused as to what "inheritance"
really mean. The judge when asking the question might not fully understand what
it means to "inherit" in the Java language. Also whoever who is going
to provide answers to the judge's question might a different understanding of
"inheritance" from the judge. Add to that, the answer will probably
get passed through who knows how many paralegal and lawyers, risking expansion
and distortion along the way...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 01:10 AM EDT |
"Inheritance does not exist among packages. It could be thought of as
existing
within a class, but to my thinking, it exists *between* classes."
True, it exists between classes... Also, inheritance DOES exist among the
packages. Specifically, every class in every package of the entire Java
language inherits from the java.lang.Object class (in the java.lang package).
java.math.BigDecimal inherits from java.lang.Number and java.lang.Object.
This is a cross package inheritance -- Point being: java.math classes inherit
from classes outside their package. This is standard practice. You try to keep
interdependency down with interfaces, but it's not always the best solution.
I'm amazed there hasn't been more talk of what an Interface is -- It's the
direct expression of an API.
To make the case that Java packages are all interconnected, and thus that
Android needed to have the same set of names for interoperability, I think it
VERY relevant that the Judge asks such questions.
Maybe the question isn't as precise as it would be if a software engineer had
posed it, but I think it illustrates that he's actually getting into the meat of
the matter.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: celtic_hackr on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 01:42 AM EDT |
I think the judge is asking a good questions, but his questions are wrong.
1) True a package won't have inheritance. Inheritance is a property that only
classes can exhibit. Classes are the prototype of an object. A class might be a
part of a larger class. Example, from top level object/class to increasingly
inherited objects/classes: Object -> Lifeform -> Animal -> Mammal ->
Canine -> Dog. So a Dog inherits from the class Canine, which inherits from
the class Mammal, etc.
2) Java is an Object Oriented Language. It is the language that exhibits
inheritance, not the operating system, which is the VM. The VM is a Java
operating system, even if it is a virtual one. A VM must have an OS and Java's
VM is the Java OS. So the judge does kind of get it right, but probably for the
wrong reasons.
The question is mostly right in what he's asking, inheritance can be described
as a function of the superclass-subclass structure. But it's really not exactly
right or the right way to ask.
Give the old man a break. I think he's doing extremely well for an old man.
Learning isn't as easy for elderly gentlemen as it is for 20 somethings. Not
everyone has a knack for understanding software design, and he's well into 2nd
and 3rd year coursework. Not bad for someone in his first semester. This is
actually a good thing, by the time this is over he may be the most qualified
judge on the bench for software and computer related matters. We want well
heeled and educated judges.
So to answer his second question. Yes, inheritance is a characteristic of the
superclass-subclass relationship as far as that goes. A class may inherit from
more than one class. For example: a class called "molecule" could
inherit from a class called "chemical" but also from a class called
"atom". It all depends on how the designer creates classes.
I think the crux of the problem is, I haven't seen much in the way of good clear
crisp information for the judge to soak up. Perhaps only one witness was. But
I'm not there and can only evaluate what I've seen and read here.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 02:29 AM EDT |
| It is very, very disturbing that the judge is so horribly misinformed. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 02:33 AM EDT |
.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hairbear on Saturday, May 05 2012 @ 03:54 AM EDT |
What worries me more than the questions is that Judge Alsop may not be aware
that Sun did not create the ideas that are the basis of OO. I think he may
believe that all the OO techniques incorporated within Java may be the original
work of Sun and embodied within the APIs. This may bolster Oracles assertion in
his mind that the creation of the Java APIs were super creative. I think that he
needs to be made aware that Java just built upon and reused many previous ideas
and techniques common in other OO languages.
hairbear
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
