meta data for this page
  •  

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
ancient_history [2020/10/30 15:55] – [Another name change. JavaCC (21)] revuskyancient_history [2020/10/30 15:57] (current) – [Another name change. JavaCC (21)] revusky
Line 105: Line 105:
 Now, first of all, to be clear about one aspect of all of this, FreeCC (now //JavaCC 21//) was never a "fork" in any real sense. A fork, i.e. a //bifurcation//, contains the implict idea that there are two (or possibly more) lines of //active development//. That is simply not the case here. As far as I know (and I would surely know it by now if this were not the case) the body of work that I did from Spring of 2008 to very early 2009, and am now resuming, is the //only// work of //any significance// that has been done on the JavaCC codebase that Sun open sourced back in 2003. Soon, that will have been 17 years ago and I do not believe that the amount of work done by the ostensible project maintainers amounts to what a single motivated person could do in a single month. There are some other people who got frustrated with the obstructionism of the canonical project maintainers and created their own "forks" of the codebase. However, I do not believe that any of them constitute a body of work remotely comparable to what was done on FreeCC. Now, first of all, to be clear about one aspect of all of this, FreeCC (now //JavaCC 21//) was never a "fork" in any real sense. A fork, i.e. a //bifurcation//, contains the implict idea that there are two (or possibly more) lines of //active development//. That is simply not the case here. As far as I know (and I would surely know it by now if this were not the case) the body of work that I did from Spring of 2008 to very early 2009, and am now resuming, is the //only// work of //any significance// that has been done on the JavaCC codebase that Sun open sourced back in 2003. Soon, that will have been 17 years ago and I do not believe that the amount of work done by the ostensible project maintainers amounts to what a single motivated person could do in a single month. There are some other people who got frustrated with the obstructionism of the canonical project maintainers and created their own "forks" of the codebase. However, I do not believe that any of them constitute a body of work remotely comparable to what was done on FreeCC.
  
-As I have stated quite bluntly above, the legacy JavaCC project is just one of these [[https://doku.javacc.com/doku.php?id=nothingburger|Nothingburger]] projects. (It is not the only one out there!) Properly understood, it is not even about the people involved in the project currently. I do not recognize the names of most of the people involved in that currently. However, it doesn't matter. There is no remotely realistic prospect of them ever doing anything for a very simple reason:+As I have stated quite bluntly above, the legacy JavaCC project is just one of these [[nothingburger]] projects. (It is not the only one out there!) Properly understood, it is not even about the people involved in the project currently. I do not recognize the names of most of the people involved in that currently. However, it doesn't matter. There is no remotely realistic prospect of them ever doing anything for a very simple reason:
  
 //Nothing significant can be done with the legacy JavaCC codebase without a massive cleanup and refactoring.// //Nothing significant can be done with the legacy JavaCC codebase without a massive cleanup and refactoring.//
Line 111: Line 111:
 I undertook that cleanup and refactoring back in 2008 and it is largely done. The only basis for moving forward on the project is [[https://github.com/javacc21/javacc21|my version of the codebase]], the one that has been cleaned up. I undertook that cleanup and refactoring back in 2008 and it is largely done. The only basis for moving forward on the project is [[https://github.com/javacc21/javacc21|my version of the codebase]], the one that has been cleaned up.
  
-A couple of people have expressed misgivings about my taking the JavaCC name. One person said that this would "create confusion". I agree that there is potentially an issue there. However, my position is that the people creating confusion are the people running the legacy JavaCC project. In general, the people running a [[https://doku.javacc.com/doku.php?id=nothingburger|Nothingburger]] project are the ones "creating confusion" because, like it or not, a cold-blooded analysis of the situation is that they are basically perpetrating a fraud, trying to portray an inactive project as something active.+A couple of people have expressed misgivings about my taking the JavaCC name. One person said that this would "create confusion". I agree that there is potentially an issue there. However, my position is that the people creating confusion are the people running the legacy JavaCC project. In general, the people running a [[nothingburger]] project are the ones "creating confusion" because, like it or not, a cold-blooded analysis of the situation is that they are basically perpetrating a fraud, trying to portray an inactive project as something active.
  
 A [[nothingburger]] is essentially a fraud, because it amounts to artfully arranging your bun and your condiments and creating a //trompe l'oeil// so that people get tricked into thinking there is actually some beef in there. A [[nothingburger]] is essentially a fraud, because it amounts to artfully arranging your bun and your condiments and creating a //trompe l'oeil// so that people get tricked into thinking there is actually some beef in there.