Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36222 > unrolled thread

Re: Type conversions with the empty string

Started byRobert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com>
First post2017-01-29 17:57 +0100
Last post2017-02-13 12:46 -0500
Articles 8 on this page of 48 — 8 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Type conversions with the empty string Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-29 17:57 +0100
    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2017-01-30 07:39 +0100
      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-30 10:08 +0100
        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2017-02-07 09:26 +0100
          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Andreas Leitgeb <avl@logic.at> - 2017-02-07 08:34 +0000
          Re: Type conversions with the empty string lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 11:20 -0800
            Re: Type conversions with the empty string Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2017-02-13 08:40 +0100
              Re: Type conversions with the empty string Andreas Leitgeb <avl@logic.at> - 2017-02-13 17:38 +0000
                Re: Type conversions with the empty string Andreas Leitgeb <avl@logic.at> - 2017-02-13 17:48 +0000
                  Re: Type conversions with the empty string Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-02-16 10:53 +0100
                  Re: Type conversions with the empty string lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-02-19 02:42 -0800
                    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-19 08:45 -0500
                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 09:20 -0500
                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 09:21 -0500
                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-19 10:51 -0500
                          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-02-19 19:55 +0100
                            Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-19 15:55 -0500
                          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 23:31 -0500
                            Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 08:39 -0500
                              Re: Type conversions with the empty string Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-02-20 06:10 -0800
                                Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 09:54 -0500
                              Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 10:25 -0500
                                Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 11:02 -0500
                                  Re: Type conversions with the empty string Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-02-20 08:45 -0800
                                    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 14:46 -0500
                                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-02-20 12:23 -0800
                                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 16:31 -0500
                                  Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 11:58 -0500
                                    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 14:46 -0500
                                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 15:45 -0500
                                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 15:54 -0500
                                          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 20:31 -0500
                    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 09:13 -0500
                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-02-19 14:43 +0000
                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 10:11 -0500
                          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-02-19 15:20 +0000
                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-19 10:53 -0500
                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-19 23:24 -0500
                          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 08:43 -0500
                            Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 10:16 -0500
                              Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 11:03 -0500
                                Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 12:00 -0500
                                  Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-20 14:49 -0500
                                    Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-20 15:47 -0500
                                      Re: Type conversions with the empty string lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-02-20 22:18 -0800
                                        Re: Type conversions with the empty string Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-02-21 08:23 -0500
              Re: Type conversions with the empty string lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-02-19 02:39 -0800
          Re: Type conversions with the empty string Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-02-13 12:46 -0500

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#36365

FromJerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>
Date2017-02-20 11:03 -0500
Message-ID<o8f3rv$8h2$2@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#36362
On 2/20/2017 10:16 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/20/2017 8:43 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 2/19/2017 11:24 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 2/19/2017 10:53 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> On 2/19/2017 9:13 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> On 2/19/2017 5:42 AM, lewbloch@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
>>>>>>> Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
>>>>>>>> Joerg Meier wrote:
>>>>>>>>> lewbloch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Anyone who puts classes in `java.lang....` like that is evil and
>>>>>>>>>> breaking the law.
>>>>>>>>> What law ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trademark and copyright law.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that depends a lot on what you use it for
>>>>> and what Java implementation.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you distribute it and call it Java then it is a
>>>>> violation of trademark.
>>>>
>>>> You can add your own code and not violate the trademark.  It is done by
>>>> every java programmer.
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, so every Java programmer out there is violating trademarks?  You're
>> only digging your hole even deeper.
>>
>>> Java programmers distribute Java applications running in a
>>> Java runtime environment.
>>>
>>
>> No.  Java programmers distribute Java applications as class and jar
>> files.  The user supplies the runtime environment that executes that
>> code.
> 
> Since classes and jar files are the application, then that is the same.
> 
>>> Java implementation programmers distribute Java runtime
>>> environments.
>>>
>>
>> That is correct.
>>
>>> Distributing a runtime environment claiming to be Java
>>> that are not exactly Java is considered a violation
>>> of the Java trademark.
>>>
>>
>> Java programmers are not distributing the runtime environment.  That's
>> where your argument falls through.
> 
> You seem to have forgotten the context.
> 
> The claim here was:
> 
>>>>> If you distribute it and call it Java then it is a
>>>>> violation of trademark.
> 
> Arne
> 
> 

Those are YOUR WORDS, Arne, not mine.  I never claimed anything about
distributing it and calling it Java.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36368

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2017-02-20 12:00 -0500
Message-ID<o8f7ag$1ahu$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#36365
On 2/20/2017 11:03 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 2/20/2017 10:16 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/20/2017 8:43 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 2/19/2017 11:24 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> Distributing a runtime environment claiming to be Java
>>>> that are not exactly Java is considered a violation
>>>> of the Java trademark.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Java programmers are not distributing the runtime environment.  That's
>>> where your argument falls through.
>>
>> You seem to have forgotten the context.
>>
>> The claim here was:
>>
>>>>>> If you distribute it and call it Java then it is a
>>>>>> violation of trademark.
>
> Those are YOUR WORDS, Arne, not mine.  I never claimed anything about
> distributing it and calling it Java.

Well - you replied to it.

Are you telling me that your reply was not about what you were quoting?

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36371

FromJerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>
Date2017-02-20 14:49 -0500
Message-ID<o8fh44$okm$3@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#36368
On 2/20/2017 12:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/20/2017 11:03 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 2/20/2017 10:16 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 2/20/2017 8:43 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> On 2/19/2017 11:24 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> Distributing a runtime environment claiming to be Java
>>>>> that are not exactly Java is considered a violation
>>>>> of the Java trademark.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Java programmers are not distributing the runtime environment.  That's
>>>> where your argument falls through.
>>>
>>> You seem to have forgotten the context.
>>>
>>> The claim here was:
>>>
>>>>>>> If you distribute it and call it Java then it is a
>>>>>>> violation of trademark.
>>
>> Those are YOUR WORDS, Arne, not mine.  I never claimed anything about
>> distributing it and calling it Java.
> 
> Well - you replied to it.
> 
> Are you telling me that your reply was not about what you were quoting?
> 
> Arne
> 
> 

Yes, I replied to it - because you are so off the wall (as you usually
are) that it isn't funny.  Once again you are furiously backpedaling and
trying to cover your arse.

It doesn't work, Arne.

The subject was creating your own java.lang.String class and inserting
it into the classpath.  Your claim of distributing something and calling
it Java is strictly YOUR claim.  No one else's.


-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36374

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2017-02-20 15:47 -0500
Message-ID<o8fkk3$60v$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#36371
On 2/20/2017 2:49 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 2/20/2017 12:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/20/2017 11:03 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> Those are YOUR WORDS, Arne, not mine.  I never claimed anything about
>>> distributing it and calling it Java.
>>
>> Well - you replied to it.
>>
>> Are you telling me that your reply was not about what you were quoting?
>
> Yes, I replied to it - because you are so off the wall (as you usually
> are) that it isn't funny.  Once again you are furiously backpedaling and
> trying to cover your arse.
>
> It doesn't work, Arne.
>
> The subject was creating your own java.lang.String class and inserting
> it into the classpath.

No. Because that does not make the Java application use the fake
String class, which is the topic being discussed.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36378

Fromlewbloch@gmail.com
Date2017-02-20 22:18 -0800
Message-ID<37e0408a-21f7-4740-8d19-0b02efea6263@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#36374
Regardless of all of the above, the Java license says, 
F. JAVA TECHNOLOGY RESTRICTIONS. You may not create, modify, or change the behavior of, or authorize your licensees to create, modify, or change the behavior of, classes, interfaces, or subpackages that are in any way identified as "java", "javax", "sun", “oracle” or similar convention as specified by Oracle in any naming convention designation.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36379

FromJerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>
Date2017-02-21 08:23 -0500
Message-ID<o8hetj$cgq$1@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#36378
On 2/21/2017 1:18 AM, lewbloch@gmail.com wrote:
> Regardless of all of the above, the Java license says, 
> F. JAVA TECHNOLOGY RESTRICTIONS. You may not create, modify, or change the behavior of, or authorize your licensees to create, modify, or change the behavior of, classes, interfaces, or subpackages that are in any way identified as "java", "javax", "sun", “oracle” or similar convention as specified by Oracle in any naming convention designation.
> 

Which is a licensing issue - not copyright or trademark.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36331

Fromlewbloch@gmail.com
Date2017-02-19 02:39 -0800
Message-ID<e3f0cca1-c7a3-4bfa-87b6-3eac3b0526e3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#36249
Joerg Meier wrote:
> lewbloch wrote:
> 
> > Anyone who puts classes in `java.lang....` like that is evil and
> > breaking the law.
> 
> What law ?

Trademark and copyright law.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36252

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2017-02-13 12:46 -0500
Message-ID<o7srdo$15g8$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#36243
On 2/7/2017 3:26 AM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:08:30 +0100, Robert Klemme wrote:
>>   - Although it is of course perfectly legal to implement a class called
>> "String" in any other package someone who does that would have to have
>> very good reasons to do it - especially since it makes any reference to
>> java.lang.String extremely tedious.
>
> You misunderstood. You can literally have a class named java.lang.String,
> and if it is early enough on the class path, it can override "the"
> java.lang.String. Due to j.l.String being final, this is (short of evil
> Reflection magic) the only way to add or change behaviour of the String
> class that still works with classes accepting only String as a parameter.
>
> Now, clearly, that is not a GOOD programming practice, but not everyone
> writes code for noble reasons. This line of thinking is more about attack
> vectors and less about accidental mistakes.

I would think/hope that if someone already have enough control to do
that, then security is totally compromised.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web