John D. Mitchell's Blog

J2SE Archives

JavaOne 2008: Day 1, The Good, The Bad, and The Lame

Another year, another JavaOne.

It's always great to see so many old friends again.

This year seems to be continuing the attendance growth trend of the last couple of year so that's a good sign. Also, I've been able to find enough actually interesting and useful talks to keep from going back to sleep and that's an even better sign. In particular, this is starting to show how the "Java community" is growing up and outwards to encompass more than just the same old things.

Here's my list of the key things from Day 1:

JavaFX... NOT!

What a joke. JavaFX was announced with great fanfare at last year's JavaOne and yet what has actually been released in a year? Nothing of value. Just more hoopla and blah blah blah. Way too little, way too late. Especially now that Adobe has started opening up Flash and friends.

Indeed, with all of the improvements to the world of JavaScript/Ajax libraries, frameworks, and tools and most especially with the growing capabilities around the support of canvas in browsers, there's very little real reason to use those wretched "Rich Internet Application" packages like Flash and JavaFX.

JavaScript

Yep, there are now a number of sessions at JavaOne covering various aspects of JavaScript. Large rooms filled with Java developers who are using JavaScript is an interesting site to see.

As Roberto Chinici said in his talk, JavaScript Programming Language: The Language That Everybody Loves to Hate, JavaScript is basically yet another Lisp-1 language. Alas, as was so clearly shown in his talk, JavaScript is a really horrible implementation of Lisp-1 -- so many nasty corners, gotchas, and just plain bizarre things. That said, given JavaScript's ubiquity in web clients and its growing use on the server, it is pretty much required for all web developers to learn JavaScript.

JAX-RS: RESTful services in Java

Yes, REST is here to stay. JAX-RS is the attempt to standardize how to build RESTful services in Java. Basically, the approach is to use a number of new bits of library (such as the URI builder that makes working with URIs actually not a completely bug-inducing nightmare) and a bunch of new annotations.

There are already at least a few implementations out in the wild including the "Jersey" reference implementation and one for the Restlet framework.

The JAX-RS (aka JSR-311) draft specification has just been released for public review -- check it out and send in your comments.

As with JavaScript, everybody doing any web services in Java needs to at least check out JAX-RS (and Restlet).

Concurrency

Is there anybody left out there in Java-land that hasn't yet gotten the memo that concurrency is a big issue today and is becoming a huge issue moving forward?

Brian Goetz's talk, Let's Resync: What's New for Concurrency on the Java Platform, Standard Edition, was primarly about one key way to solve a number of problems was very well attended and people should check it out online.

Basically, coming in Java v7 is an addition to the java.util.concurrent library which adds a lot of support for building Fork-Join style concurrency solutions. For those who can't wait, check out Doug Lea's existing implementation that is part of his util.concurrent library.

Java v7 looks to have some nice features that both allow for very general Fork-Join solutions as well as things like the ParallelArray class which makes it ridiculously easy to concurrently process arrays of information. Joe Bob says: Check it out.

JaveOne 2007, Java Puzzlers Points Out Problems with Kitchen Sink

Josh Bloch and Neal Gafter have been doing their wonderful Java Puzzlers shtick at JavaOne for the last 4 years. This year, Bill Pugh has stepped in for Neal to keep the puzzlers puzzling.

The puzzles point out all sorts of interesting and exasperating gotchas in the Java language and libraries that linger for ages waiting to humble us all.

This year's set of puzzles include a slew of problems that come as a direct result of the addition of auto-boxing/-unboxing of primitives to/from their object wrapper types (int and Integer, for example). Maybe it's just me but I seem to recall a lot of us who said how bad the consequences would be of adding auto-boxing to Java and yet here they are causing exactly the worst kinds of insidiously non-obvious problems.

The moral of these puzzles isn't merely "be careful of using wrapper types with the ternary operator", but that auto-boxing is evil and should have never been added to the language in the first place.

Of course, it goes without saying that this is just one example of how new "features" added to a mature language are very dangerous. One of the big, currently brewing brouhahas is over the proposed addition of closures to Java. Perhaps folks might want to pause their rampant fervor for a bit and actually look at the history of these attempts and realize just how costly these changes really are. Especially when there are plenty of alternatives like using other languages which have their pet features which target the underlying JVM.

As Josh so eloquently put, "APIs, like diamonds, are forever."

JaveOne 2007, Where's Apple?

As noted by various people, including Malcolm Davis, there's a lot of Apple laptops in evidence at the show this year. In particular, a whole slew of them on-stage for the keynote sessions.

But where's Apple? Really?

For all of Apple's pledges that Java is a first class citizen, Java support on OS X has been tardy, at best. Each new, major release of Java takes many months (as in over a year) to show up on Apple machines. That's just plain retarded.

Of course, it always takes two to tango so I have to also ask "what is Sun doing to help or hinder Java on OS X?"

Humane interfaces, simplisticity, and domain languages

Elliotte Rusty Harold has touched off a small war in his response to Martin Fowler's recent entry on so-called Humane Interfaces.

One facet of the debate is an example comparing the equivalent "List" classes from Ruby (Array) and Java (java.util.List). Java's list class has 25 methods while Ruby's has 78 methods. Martin uses that fact to conclude that Ruby's list class is somehow more "humane" while Elliotte's thinks it's just bloated and that a minimal interface is better in terms of how people work.

Martin's primary argument for the "more is better" approach is that:

Humane interfaces do more work so that clients don't have to. In particular the human users of the API need things so that their common tasks are easy to do - both for reading and writing.

More buttons/methods does not make an object more powerful or more humane, quite the opposite in fact. Simplicity is a virtue. Smaller is better.

As you might have guessed, I think both of them are partially right and that there's something even more important that they are really bringing up that should be discussed.

For example, list.first() is actually more humane/usable/readable/etc. than list.get(0). Why? Because the intent needs to be clear and obvious to humans, not just the compiler. Even worse, crap like list.get(list.size() - 1) is just plain wretched compared to list.last() -- intent, clarity, complicatedness, easy to get wrong (off by one), etc. Also, look at how many parts of the list abstraction are "leaked" in just those two examples such as linear positioning, indexing, zero based indices, the first element is "always" at position zero, reliable sizing, etc.

However, Elliotte is completely right that having 78 methods in any class is an atrocity. Something that has that much surface area is way too complicated for humans to keep manageable. In addition, it also sets a bad example for coders learning the recommended ways of doing things -- i.e., "just throw anything you feel like in there."

Going to the opposite extreme of a bare minimum, necessary set of methods is also too simplistic. For example, Elliot throws downs an image of various remote controls, two fairly complicated "universal" remotes and a minimalistic one from Apple. But, who gets to chose what that minimal set will be for everybody? In software, almost everyone will end up wasting time and introduce bugs by writing their own versions of truly common bits of code. Software is, in this regard, much more of an engineering practice than a mathematical reduction.

Hopefully it's obvious that there's a reasonable middle ground. Like any good standard, deciding on what to put into the core library should be about codifying truly common behavior rather than what might sound good to any one special interest group. Other important tools in this effort are things like good design principles and refactoring. [I find it ironic that Elliot brought up the issue of refactoring in a debate with Martin.] Also, the both extremes miss out the addressing the specific needs of the context in which the code is being used: a pro using something everyday vs. a serious hobbyist vs. a random user vs. a half-blind grandmother with rheumatoid arthritis vs. .... Context matters.

Alas, arguing back and forth over those sorts of details makes it easy to miss a fundamental, crucial point: no software (library, application, language, operating system, or whatever) can be all things to all people. Fighting that war is not only pointless but is one of my definitions of insanity. The point of a chunk of good software is to enable the effective and efficient creation of more good software and to help inhibit the creation of bad software.

So, how do we then build up our own code to fix whatever shortcomings we find? Build our own libraries on top of whatever the core gives us which provide the clean abstractions and domain specific languages to get our jobs done, well.

GCC turns 4.0

The GNU folks have released version 4.0 of the venerable GCC compiler with built-in support for the C, C++, Objective-C, Ada, Fortran, and Java programming languages.

The biggest general change is the completely new intermediate language representation based on tree SSA. SSA (Static, Single Assignment) is a modern approach to the intermediate representation of the parsed programs which allows for a much more sane and aggressive approach to optimization.

On the Java front, the GCJ sub-project has made major improvements including better support of AWT and Swing and a lot more of the other Java libraries such as java.util.regex. If you didn't know, GCC can generate native (machine-specific) binaries directly from Java code.

Check out the ChangeLog for more details.

MacWorld 2005: Boom and Bust

MacWorld Expo 2005 is the consumer-focused show/exhibit/conference for all things related to Apple Computers. I've been going to the show for the last two years because Steve Jobs is funny as a keynote speaker and because I switched to a 17" Al-PowerBook when they came out. Alas, in stark contrast from years past, Apple seems to have stopped giving out goodies to attendees of the keynote (which, lets face it, is the real reason that a geek would want to sit through hours of rah rah marketing amongst a sea of Apple fanatics :-). Now that you have some idea of my bias, here's my take what did and did not get announced...

iLife vs. iWork

Lots of improvements to the various applications which are part of the "iLife" suite (iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, and GarageBand). Basically, the key takeaways are that Apple is lowering the price to $79, they seem to be listening to the user base and actually implementing a lot of features that people have been clamoring for (such as multi-track recording in GarageBand) while redesigning the internals (to better support e.g., RAW image formats and Hi-Definition Video) and externals (to actually make the programs easier to use). There's definitely a lesson in there for software developers.

Apple also introduced the new iWork suite of so-called productivity applications. [I qualify such things as "so-called" because of the inordinate amount of time and effort that we spend using them but that doesn't result in anything useful.] iWork consists of a significantly upgraded Keynote presentation maker and the new Pages document maker. I call Pages a document maker rather than a word processor because it's really targeted at the user who wants to quickly create various types of complete documents. How so? One of the areas that Steve Jobs hammered on in the keynote is how all of the Apple applications are trying to help users get started via e.g., "Themes" (ala Keynote), "Books" (aka photo albums in iPhoto), and "Templates" in Pages. I.e., Apple is working to help kickstart their users. That way, users can quickly focus on (a) adding content and (b) tweak the look rather than getting stuck in the purgatory that is a blank page. Yes, other folks have tried the same thing but it's definition instructional to see how a bit of extra focus on the aesthetics and actual user experience goes a long way. Lest I become repetitive, I'll refrain from saying that there's a lesson in there for software developers.

From a gossip- and conspiracy-addict's point of view, it's quite interesting to note how iWork does not contain either a spreadsheet or a personal-scale database. This is a deft deflection of the whole question of whether Apple is going to war with Microsoft in the work applications space. As with the iPod strategy, Apple is playing from their strengths and can slowly encroach into the MS Office market with each new generation of the suite. I don't know what Apple may be playing with in terms of spreadsheets but they certainly have a strong, existing community around the FileMaker database system. At $79 for the suite, there's hope yet that ridiculous pricing for office suites will be improving in the future -- but I won't be holding my breath.

mini-Mac

Oh, yeah, well that's what the new Mac mini should be called. There's plenty of folks getting all excited about this but I'm a bit skeptical. $499 sounds like a good price but that's for a machine which only has 256MB of RAM. Going to a realistic 1GB of RAM will cost you another $425 (buying it from Apple) -- that's highway robbery. To get a "Super" CD/DVD drive instead of the baseline "Combo" drive adds another $100. Apple is pitching the mini-Mac as a good machine for things like build farms (and hence, cheap render farms and the like) but note that the mini-Mac doesn't have gigabit-ethernet -- only 100Mbit.

Now, all that said, I think there are a couple of interesting markets where the mini-Mac will be effective. The first is to upgrade the machines of the relatives who are always bugging you to keep their MS Windows boxes running (but aren't anywhere near ready for e.g., Linux). If they already have a nice monitor then getting them a mini-Mac seems like a very reasonable option. I switched my Dad and one of my Aunts to 17" iMacs awhile back and even with the transition pains, my support load has dropped dramatically (i.e., it's almost all just senile user errors these days :-). The second interesting use is for people who travel but don't really need or can't afford a desktop replacement laptop. If you're not a power user then having a nice monitor, etc. at work and at home and just throw the mini-Mac in a bag and you're all set.

iPod Kerfluffle

Well, Apple finally answered my complaint about the high price of the iPod mini... Apple has released the iPod Shuffle. This time, they hit the price points spot on with a $99 base model which has 512MB of flash memory and a 1GB version for $149. The iPod shuffle is a brilliant answer to the flash-base MP3 player market. It's tiny, it has a very competitive price/capability ratio, and it's simple. The genius is that Apple simplified the entire model of how a flash-based player works. How? They completely got rid of the general purpose display. How can they do that and still create a usable device? They realized that all of the heavy lifting with the tiny device would be done in the iTunes software when you've connected the device to your computer. That is to say that Apple looked at the notion of mobile music playing as a complete system and focused making the systemic experience better. The iPod Shuffle is going to decimate the competition. There's a big lesson here for people who consider themselves architects.

Now, for some balance, the prices and capabilities of the iPod mini and the full-scale iPods still a bit sore spot. Given the unit volumes that Apple is selling iPods, the price/capability ratio sucks. I was hoping for a shock and awe announcement of a new high-end iPod that had built-in WiFi and support for WiFi delivered VOIP telecommunications. Now that would be a brilliant bit of sidestepping of the whole cellular carrier wars and would drive the mobile communication market into new territory.

Java Developers Get the Shaft

In the past, Apple has said that they care about Java. Alas, the patterns of fact show that to be a very arguable point. Java support on the Apple platform has always been and continues to be a third-class citizen. Heck, developers in general are only, at best, considered second-class citizens by Apple. The fact is that the Mac OS X 10.4 ('Tiger') release is at least 6 months late and that Apple has locked Java v1.5 to the Tiger release. Jobs was extremely vague about the release date for Tiger, saying that it will be out in the first half of 2005. That means that Java v1.5 support on the Apple platform will be about 1 year behind the Sun FCS release. Yeah, sure, that's commitment to Java and Java developers. Various folks have been pestering Apple to release a version that runs under the current Mac OS X 10.3. The gossip that I've heard is that Apple has cut back on the staffing of the Java team and just doesn't have the resources to make that happen. For shame! Of course, there are lessons in here about how backwards businesses are in their indignant misunderstanding of the value of developers as business catalysts but I won't bore you with that rant. :-)

JCK's New Bait-n-Switch Licensing

Sun's Graham Hamilton has just announced the release of the Java Compatibility Kit (JCK) for J2SE under a read-only license.

Whoopity do!

If, heaven forbid, one wants to actually use the JCK at all, you are required to either submit to the onerous SCSL (Sun Community Source License) or upcoming JDL (Java Development License). If you want to use it commercially, you have negotiate a commercial license with Sun (at least $50,000.00).

Geez, doesn't this remind you of Microsoft's incredibly lame "shared source" insanity?

As always, I'm a firm believer that, hey, it's Sun's property and they can do whatever they please with it but Sun's mealy-mouthed, half-assed, Janus-faced approach to "opening" up Java is, frankly, insulting. Sun: if you want to continue with your dictatorial control of Java, just be honest and say so but stop all of the weasely, self-righteous BS -- or return to your bold roots and get serious about truly opening Java up to the world.

Is it stew, yet?

Before directing you to an essay on Language Oriented Programming, I want to make one other comment about this particular pumpkin soup. We're eating it today and yet I made it Tuesday night. I learned this at a restaurant I worked in. The chef served "yesterday's soup" instead of "the soup of the day". He said that most people know that soup always tastes better the next day so that's when he serves it. This gets to John Mitchell's Slack post. It would be nice to have the time to work ahead on some project and let it sit. You could then come back to it in a couple of days and have the fresh perspective to improve it before serving.

In XP, one of the benefits of pair programming is the difference of perspectives between the current driver and the copilot. Another refreshing perspective change comes when shifting between the two roles. One of the biggest benefits of test-driven development is the forced change in perspective as you shift back and forth between test writing and code writing.

If you're not working in a pair, you can simulate this yourself by working on a task for awhile and then put it aside and come back to it later.

Obviously, the relatively short granularities on the order of minutes are good for getting some kinds of perspective, it's critical to also sprinkle in the larger granularities of days and weeks. There's nothing like a sleep cycle or three to let your brain disengage consciously but continue percolating on it unconsciously to brew some fresh thinking.

Java J2SE v1.5.0 FCS Released

Java J2SE v1.5.0, aka "Tiger", has been officially released by Sun.

Is this all that you hoped it would be?

Refactoring Java?

In the spirit of If you could get rid of one thing from Java..., if you could, what one thing about Java would you "fix"? This question is as inclusive as you want to make it. You want Java "open-sourced"? Or you'd like generics implemented "properly" instead of via type erasure? Or you want Sun to fix the insane version numbering scheme for Java? Share it here.

"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress." --Joseph Joubert

If you could get rid of one thing from Java...?

In the spirit of If I could add one thing to Java, I'd like to know what one thing you would take out of Java, if you had the chance. Not add, extend, tweak, exchange, or change but just what you would get rid of completely.

"You know you've achieved perfection in design,
  not when you have nothing more to add,
  but when you have nothing more to take away." --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Sun says no decision on open-sourcing Java

Well, the earlier blather about the potential of open-sourcing Java seems to be squashed by this report.

The biggest thing, IMHO, is Gosling's quote implying that there is a serious discussion about this going on inside Sun.

Sun considering some sort of "open source" for Java, maybe

Gee, could this be any more wishy-washy? This article in the Inquirer quotes Sun's Java Technology Evangelist, Raghavan Srinivas saying that there will be an open sourced version of Java: "It might be today, tomorrow or two years down the road."

Ah, the original source article has a bit more information.

Playing with Java v1.5 on Mac OS X

Sam Pullara has done some work to help people run some of the Java v1.5 features on Mac OS X. Note that his work is based upon the bundles made available as part of JSR-14 and is therefore a bit out of date relative to the official releases for other platforms (even more so when the next official beta is release in the next couple of weeks).

I don't know about you but I'm finding Apple's lackluster commitment to Java on Mac OS X a bit frustrating.

JSR 170 goes public

The public review period for JSR 170: Content Repository for Java technology API is open now until July 19, 2004.

Sun to meet with IBM on open-sourcing Java?

Eweek is claiming that, in reponse to IBM's open-letter to Sun to open-source Java, unnamed sources at Sun are telling Eweek that Sun representatives will meet with IBM to discuss open-sourcing Java.

IBM's open lettter to Sun: Open-Source Java

In response to Sun's Simon Phipps' rant about Eric Raymond's open letter to Sun to open-source Java, IBM Vice President Rod Smith has called for Sun to open-source Java in a letter to Sun Vice President Rob Gingell. Smith offers IBM's support to create an independent organization to control Java.

Sun's Phipps rants on Raymond's open-source rant

In an article in the UK's PC Pro magazine, Sun fires back over Open Source Java accusations, Simon Phipps, Sun's Chief Technology Evangelist and java.net blogger, rails about Eric Raymond's recent open letter to Sun, Let Java Go.

Seems pretty clear that both sides make some points and miss their marks. I don't have the time right now into a blow by blow analysis but I will say that I'm personally sick and tired of Open-Source fanatics saying that everything should be open sourced. It's Sun's property and they can do whatever they want to do with it (whether we like it or not). On the other side, I'm equally sick and tired of Sun saying that they do NOT have any extra level of control over the rest of the JCP powers -- that's patently false -- check out my earlier blog on that particular subject, Open, Independent JCP?.

Generics Tutorial

Sun has released Gilad Bracha's Generics Tutorial.

JSR 166, A Case Study

Check out my Artima blog entry on the case study of JSR 166: Concurrency Utilities.

JSR 133 goes public

JSR 133 -- Java Memory Model and Thread Specification Revision has been released for public review. Note that the review period ends on March 7, 2004 so check it out and submit your comments sooner rather than later.

J2SE v1.5 'Tiger' beta 1 release

Sun has released J2SE v1.5 beta 1. Go wild!

J2SE v1.5.0-alpha availability with JSR-166 updates

Rather than being forced to register at JavaLobby to be able to get access to the release, you can download the Java 2 SDK, Standard Edition v1.5.0 alpha release directly from Sun.

People interested in the JSR-166 Concurrency additions should note that the Tiger alpha release does not contain the latest version of the package. You can get the latest version from the JSR 166 resources web site.

Two on Exceptions

Here are a couple of recent articles with recommendations of Java exception handling practices...

From onjava.com, Gunjan Doshi gives us his Best Practices for Exception Handling.

From java.net, Jim Cushing gives us hisThree Rules for Effective Exception Handling. The questions of what, where, and why are spot on.

Microsoft Clarifies Intentions to Retire JVM-Based Products

Earlier this week, I blogged about Microsoft phasing out products which depend on Java. Well, the agile marketing arm of Microsoft has flexed its muscles again with... Microsoft Clarifies Intentions to Retire JVM-Based Products.

Basically, all they have done is pushed the drop dead date back one measely week and are more precise about which products are getting whacked. Yawn.

More on "Java Desktop System"

There's a big thread over on /. about the "Java Desktop System".

Note clearly that the thread contains the typically low signal-to-noise ratio that /. is so famous for. You have been warned! :-)

Microsoft phasing out products which depend on Java

Microsoft is citing the settlement over Java with Sun as the reason that Microsoft is pulling the plug on a number of versions of various products. Here's an article from Eweek that goes into more depth on this.

I particularly like this bit of spin from Microsoft:

"We will not ship products that include a piece of software we can not provide security fixes for, thus we are phasing out some older products and re-releasing some older products without the VM. This applies to all channels." --Tony Goodhew, Microsoft Developer Division

Of course, this is also a good excuse for Microsoft to push customers to pay for expensive upgrades.

Are debuggers a wasteful timesink?

Bob Martin starts a raucous discussion when he states that Debuggers are wasteful Timesinks.

To paraphrase a character from the last Matrix movie... Debuggers are just a tool. It is how the tool is used that is good or bad.

Lame "survey" on Java reliability

First off, let me question the fact that nowhere is it listed in the article that we can't actually get a copy of the survey and survey results without signing up for one of Wiley Technologies seminars (i.e., sales pitches). Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Now, without a much better idea of the actual contents of the survey it's ridiculous to rely on any of the so-called results of the survey. Let's just say, for the moment, that I'm skeptical all around all of the numbers. I call on Wiley Technology to provide the full survey and results to one and all so that we can decide for ourselves.

Users and Vendors debate JCP vs. Open Source Java

Nice to see some of the vendors go on record about making Java open source.

Here's an artice talking with Oracle and Sun about the JCP and the newly proposed JCP v2.6.

Here's a ComputerWorld article talking with various vendors and users.

Here's an interview with Sun's Jonathan Schwartz on the issue.

Here's more on the subject in an interview with James Gosling and here's my earlier blog on the JCP vs. open source session at JavaOne.

Gosling on Open Sourcing Java

James provides a nice, insider view of some of the thinking around open sourcing Java. There's a nice bit in there about the whole Microsoft fiasco too.

Scheduling Snafu

Yes indeed, you know the cluetrain has left the station when perennial favorite, Doug Lea, has his Concurrency talk scheduled in one of the tiny session rooms. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense at a developer conference.

The best suggestion that I heard to help make up for it would be to make Doug's talk available online for free -- instead of having to fork out $40 (on top of the conference fee!) to be able to get access to all of the conferences sessions online.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.