Instead of OO "dogmatism" it uses old-fashioned procedural dogmatism. That, seems, was not enough, so Go added generics and finally reached state of Java5
Go-style error handling and propagation produces enormous amounts of boilerplate noise, which makes business logic barely visible
Despite existence of Go, Google still uses and continues to write internally a huge amounts of Java code
Java also can produce standalone binaries, but this is not so often necessary. Didn't get your phrase about harassment. Perhaps it's something only you can feel.
P.S. I wrote commercial Go code and worked at Google (and their monorepo), so I know what I'm talking about.
You mistake me for somebody who likes Go — I don't. I think it was a particularly uninspired effort of 2007+ programming language design.
That said I'm aware that before Oracle got its mittens on Java it was one of the blessed four:
You have to play inside the fence defined by C++, Java, Python, and JavaScript.
Even when looking at the Closure Library I couldn't shake the impression that it was designed to appeal to the Java developer mindset — but that is just my personal opinion.
So it goes to reason that by the time Oracle acquired Sun MicroSystems in 2010 Google already had built up a substantial legacy Java code base that was too extensive to eliminate.
My experience with Google is much more recent and by that time Google actively used Java, both in existing and in the new projects.
As for harrasment: case between Google and Oracle is about money between two giant corporations. Despite how it was often represented in media, it was not battle between "good Google" and "greedy Oracle" about Java. And actually didn't presented any danger to Java. Anyway, the battle is over.
As for other cases, I really don't care. From the moment when Oracle made Java open source, their behavior is largely irrelevant - Java will survive regardless from Oracle actions.
This piece is by Rich Sharples, Senior Director of Product Management at Red Hat
Software vendors, including Red Hat, offer OpenJDK distributions and support to make sure that those who had been reliant on Oracle JDK have a seamless transition to take care of the above risks associated with not having OpenJDK support. It also allows customers and partners to focus on their business software, rather than needing to spend valuable engineering efforts on underlying Java runtimes.
On May 27, 2008 Ted Neward published Dead like COBOL - Is Java ripe for replacement?.
And here we are 13+ years later. That type of legacy has enormous inertia.
If anything (one of my pet hypotheses is that) Google developed Go to de-emphasize the importance of Java within that organization:
Java also can produce standalone binaries, but this is not so often necessary. Didn't get your phrase about harassment. Perhaps it's something only you can feel.
P.S. I wrote commercial Go code and worked at Google (and their monorepo), so I know what I'm talking about.
You mistake me for somebody who likes Go — I don't. I think it was a particularly uninspired effort of 2007+ programming language design.
That said I'm aware that before Oracle got its mittens on Java it was one of the blessed four:
Even when looking at the Closure Library I couldn't shake the impression that it was designed to appeal to the Java developer mindset — but that is just my personal opinion.
So it goes to reason that by the time Oracle acquired Sun MicroSystems in 2010 Google already had built up a substantial legacy Java code base that was too extensive to eliminate.
Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.
Now that was largely about Android.
But it has a habit of getting into the headlines:
Sorry, for mistake, didn't mean to be offensive.
My experience with Google is much more recent and by that time Google actively used Java, both in existing and in the new projects.
As for harrasment: case between Google and Oracle is about money between two giant corporations. Despite how it was often represented in media, it was not battle between "good Google" and "greedy Oracle" about Java. And actually didn't presented any danger to Java. Anyway, the battle is over.
As for other cases, I really don't care. From the moment when Oracle made Java open source, their behavior is largely irrelevant - Java will survive regardless from Oracle actions.
The OpenJDK Transition: Things to know and do
More recently: Why Red Hat dumped CentOS for CentOS Stream
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch
Businesses need to get paid for their (commercial) support but the dynamics of how they ensure that they get paid should give one reason for pause.
Is the Oracle vs Google thing that bad? I honestly never considered the corporate aspect, so thanks for this.
Wikipedia: Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.
The other thing is that Oracle has a tendency to always look for better ways to fleece its customers — leading to corporate goals like this:
Migration Complete – Amazon’s Consumer Business Just Turned off its Final Oracle Database