Suggestion

["Alex G." <al...@solarapex.com>]

Hello,

I just joined the list and am not sure if this topic has been already
discussed. 

The idea to have platform independent API for different platforms is great.
But, that makes me think that if APR could provide Java interfaces to APR,
that could bring a big benefit to Java Developers who are struggling with
creating own implementation of common things like network functions, etc.

Regards,
Alexander Glazkov

Re: Suggestion

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

At 01:38 PM 8/20/2005, Alex G. wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I just joined the list and am not sure if this topic has been already
>discussed. 
>
>The idea to have platform independent API for different platforms is great.
>But, that makes me think that if APR could provide Java interfaces to APR,
>that could bring a big benefit to Java Developers who are struggling with
>creating own implementation of common things like network functions, etc.

It has :)  I've proposed the oo-dev@apr list to develop one
framework, implemented in java, c++, .NET, perl, what have you,
using consistent namespaces and construction/destruction
logic and object scope for any object-oriented wrapper.

So that, jumping from java to mod_perl, for example, everyone
would be on the same page and moving from language to language
for the developer would be trivial.

Bill

RE: Suggestion

["Alex G." <al...@solarapex.com>]

Brane,

> >The idea to have platform independent API for different platforms is
> great.
> >But, that makes me think that if APR could provide Java interfaces to APR,
> >that could bring a big benefit to Java Developers who are struggling with
> >creating own implementation of common things like network functions, etc.
> >
> So, are you saying that the Java runtime is less portable than APR? I
> can't imagine what kind of network functions you have in mind that you
> can't implement with the stuff in the J2SE library.

>From what I see, yes, Java runtime is less portable in many areas. I am not that familiar with APR yet though. If Java Runtime is more portable than another level of abstraction, then SWT would not have such a big success. 

With regard to network functions. Full ICMP support lacks for years, not to mention access to raw sockets.

This idea may sound lame, but Java is not self sufficient as it seems. Sun adds some native calls to their API (e.g. in Sun added NetworkInterface, in 1.6 Sun added concurrency utilities), but the process is slow due to JCP bureaucracy. 

Regards,
Alex

Re: Suggestion

[Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>]

Alex G. wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I just joined the list and am not sure if this topic has been already
>discussed. 
>
>The idea to have platform independent API for different platforms is great.
>But, that makes me think that if APR could provide Java interfaces to APR,
>that could bring a big benefit to Java Developers who are struggling with
>creating own implementation of common things like network functions, etc.
>  
>
So, are you saying that the Java runtime is less portable than APR? I 
can't imagine what kind of network functions you have in mind that you 
can't implement with the stuff in the J2SE library.

-- Brane