|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 09:01 PM EDT |
But otherwise a fine statement of the situation.
In Java, a "class" (data structure + functions that operate on it)
implements an "interface" if it implements all of the methods in the
interface.
that is, if I have an interface called simple_arithmetic, with methods add,
subtract, multiply, and divide, then my custom class BigNumber (for numbers too
large to properly represent in only 64 bits, like 2^43106117-1) implements
simple_arithmetic if it implements the add, subtract, multiply and divide
methods.
Other classes for which this interface makes sense can also implement
it...particularly numbers in the usual sense.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: YurtGuppy on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 09:38 PM EDT |
They have talked so much about methods and classes. Now he is bringing up
interfaces and exceptions. Not doing much Java, I don't remember if there are
other inherited traits. But sure sounds like he is tying up the loose ends.
If the classes (and methods) must be the way they are, and if the interfaces and
exceptions must be the way they are, then the whole thing must be the way it is,
and the SSO black knight ("it's just a flesh wound!") has been
dismembered.
---
a small fish in an even smaller pond[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 10:15 PM EDT |
Your quick answers are rubbish. The questions ask about applications, not
compiled bytecode. Applications written in java for the most part can be made to
run on android with minor adjustments.
The huge advantage of reusing the API though is that it is a language which many
programmers already speak. The idea of making a device which understands java is
that it can be used immediately by all java speakers without requiring them all
to learn a new language. And that is why copyrighting an API is a really bad
idea. It is a language.
An API is not so much an expression as a medium for expression. A single API
instruction carries meaning, but is analogous to a single word in english (which
also carries meaning). Just as you cannot copyright a word or indeed the set of
words and grammar which constitute a language, so too you should not be able to
copyright an API, which is a language in the world of computer programming.
Languages are tools for thinking and expressing thought. Once someone learns
Java it becomes a part of their headology - a tool for thinking and expression -
a part of their brain. Nobody should own that. It is like trying to claim
ownership of thoughts.
To rule otherwise would be to force each person wishing to speak creatively in
the realm of computer science to invent their own language. All significant
software projects are collaborative so I can't see how that could work. In a
world where all programmers have to speak a different language then good luck
getting that new tower of babel application compiled and written.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
