Related
I studied somewhere that to execute on different processor architectures Java is interpreted. If it would use compiler then there would be some (Machine Code) instructions which would be specific to processor architectures and Java would be platform dependent.
But since java use interpreter it is processor architecture independent.
My question is how can the java use JIT (Just In Time) Compiler? Doesn't the processor's architectures affect it? If it doesn't affect it, then why doesn't it affect it?
There isn't just one JIT compiler. There is a different one for each architecture, so there's one for Windows 32-bit, one for Windows 64-bit etc.
Your Java code is the same across all platforms. That is compiled into byte code by the Java compiler. The byte code is also the same across all platforms.
Now we run your Java program on Windows 32-bit. The JVM starts up and it interprets the byte code and turns that into machine code for that architecture. Note that that JVM is specifically for this architecture.
If we run your program on another architecture, another variation of the JVM will be used to interpret the byte code.
That's why you see all these different download links when you download the JRE:
Your java code is interpreted to byte code and is not platform dependent. But to run your machine code you need a JVM, the JVM is platform dependent, you cannot download an x86 JVM and run it on an ARM processor and vice versa.
The idea is that the JVM is platform dependent but your code is not.
The java program life cycle goes as follows.
Source code is compiled into Java Byte Code (aka .class files),
Java Byte Code is then interpreted by the JVM which performs the Just In Time compilation sending instructions your specific processor architecture can understand.
Its important to understand that compilation is just another way to say "translation", and does not always mean compiling to binary. Also, interpretation is similar, but is done per instruction, as needed by the program.
But more specifically in your question, JIT is the interpretation done by the JVM, which is coded specifically for each processor architecture.
I sometimes wonder why Java is referred as a Platform Independent Language?
I couldn't find a proper explanation of the below points :
Is the JVM same for Windows/Linux/Mac OS?
Are the bytecode generated same for a same Class in the above environments?
If the answer to the above questions are NO then how the platform independence is achieved.
Please help me out in learning this basic concept.
Is the JVM same for Windows/Linux/Mac OS?
Not at all. Compiler is same across the platforms. But, since it is an executable file, the file itself will be different i.e. on Windows, it would be .exe, on Linux, it would be Linux executable etc.
Are the bytecode generated same for a same Class in the above environments?
Yes. That is why Java is COMPILE ONCE. RUN ANYWHERE.
Before starting please read this doc by oracle
Machine Dependence: This means that whatever you want to execute on your hardware architecture will not be able to execute on another architecture. Like If you have created an executable for your AMD architecture it will not be able to run on Intel's architecture. Now comes Platform Dependence is that you have created some executable for your Windows OS which won't be able to run on Linux.Code written in Assembly(provided by your processor) or Machine Language are machine dependent but if you write code in C,CPP,JAVA then your code is machine independent which is provided by underlying OS.
Platform Independence:If you create some C or CPP code then it becomes platform dependent because it produces an intermediate file i.e. compiled file which matches to the instruction set provided by underlying OS. So you need some mediator which can understand both compiler and OS.Java achieved this by creating JVM. Note: No language is machine independent if you remove the OS which itself is a program created using some language which can directly talk to your underlying machine architecture. OS is such a program which takes your compiled code and run it ontop of the underlying architecture.
The meaning of platform independence is that you only have to distribute your Java program in one format.
This one format will be interpreted by JVMs on each platform (which are coded as different programs optimized for the platform they are on) such that it can run anywhere a JVM exists.
1 ) Is the JVM same for Windows/Linux/Mac OS?
Answer ===> NO , JVM is different for All
2 ) Are the bytecode generated same for a same Class in the above environments?
Answer ====> YES , Byte code generated will be the same.
Below explanation will give you more clarification.
{App1(Java code)------>App1byteCode}........{(JVM+MacOS) help work with App1,App2,App3}
{App2(Java Code)----->App2byteCode}........{(JVM+LinuxOS) help work with App1,App2,App3}
{App3(Java Code)----->App3byteCode}........{(JVM+WindowsOS) help work with App1,App2,App3}
How This is Happening ?
Ans--> JVM Has capability to Read ByteCode and Response In Accordance with the underlying OS As the JVM is in Sync with OS.
So we find, we need JVM with Sync with Platform.
But the main Thing is, That the programmer do not have to know specific knowledge of the Platform and program his application keeping one specific platform in mind.
This Flexibility of write Program in Java Language --- compile to bytecode and run on any Machine (Yes need to have Platform DEPENDENT JVM to execute it) makes Java Platform Independent.
Java is called a plattform indipendent language, because virtually all you need to run your code on any operating system, is that systems JVM.
The JVM "maps" your java codes commands to the system's commands, so you don't have to change your code for any operating system, but just install that system's JVM (which should be provided Oracle)
The credo is "Write once, run anywhere."
Watch this 2 min video tutorial hope this will help you understand that why java is platform independent? Everything is explained in just 2 min and 37 seconds.
Why Java is platform independent?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn8hdwxkyKI
And here is explanation given below;
There are two steps required to run any java program i.e.
(i) Compilation &
(ii) Interpretation Steps.
Java compiler, which is commonly known as "javac" is used to compile any java file. During compilation process, java compiler will compile each & every statement of java file. If the java program contains any error then it will generate error message on the Output screen. On successful completion of compilation process compiler will create a new file which is known as Class File / Binary Coded File / Byte Code File / Magic Code File.
Generated class file is a binary file therefore java interpreter commonly known as Java is required to interpret each & every statement of class file. After the successful completion of interpretation process, machine will generate Output on the Output screen.
This generated class file is a binary coded file which is depends on the components provided by java interpreter (java) & does not depends on the tools & components available in operating system.
Therefore, we can run java program in any type of operating system provided java interpreter should be available in operating system. Hence, Java language is known as platform independent language.
Two things happen when you run an application in Java,
Java compiler (javac) will compile the source into a bytecode (stored in a .class file)
The java Byte Code (.class) is OS independent, it has same extension in all the different OSs. But since this is not specific to any OS or other environment no one can run this (Unless there is a machine whose native instruction set is bytecodes, i.e. they can understand bytecode itself)
JVM load and execute the bytecode
A virtual machine (VM) is a software implementation of a machine (i.e. a computer) that executes programs like a physical machine. Java also has a virtual machine called Java Virtual Machine (JVM).
JVM has a class loader that loads the compiled Java Bytecode to the Runtime Data Areas. And it has an execution engine which executes the Java Bytecode. And importantly he JVM is platform dependent. You will have different JVM for different operating systems and other environments.
The execution engine must change the bytecode to the language that can be executed by the machine in the JVM. This includes various tasks such as finding performance bottlenecks and recompiling (to native code) frequently used sections of code. The bytecode can be changed to the suitable language in one of two ways,
Interpreter : Reads, interprets and executes the bytecode instructions one by one
JIT (Just-In-Time) compiler : The JIT compiler has been introduced to compensate for the disadvantages of the interpreter. The execution engine runs as an interpreter first, and at the appropriate time, the JIT compiler compiles the entire bytecode to change it to native code. After that, the execution engine no longer interprets the method, but directly executes using native code. Execution in native code is much faster than interpreting instructions one by one. The compiled code can be executed quickly since the native code is stored in the cache.
So in a summary Java codes will get compiled into a bytecode which is platform independent and Java has a virtual machine (JVM) specific to each different platforms (Operation systems and etc) which can load and interpret those bytecodes to the machine specific code.
Refer :
https://www.cubrid.org/blog/understanding-jvm-internals/
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/getStarted/intro/definition.html
I'm trying to get a better understanding of the difference. I've found a lot of explanations online, but they tend towards the abstract differences rather than the practical implications.
Most of my programming experiences has been with CPython (dynamic, interpreted), and Java (static, compiled). However, I understand that there are other kinds of interpreted and compiled languages. Aside from the fact that executable files can be distributed from programs written in compiled languages, are there any advantages/disadvantages to each type? Oftentimes, I hear people arguing that interpreted languages can be used interactively, but I believe that compiled languages can have interactive implementations as well, correct?
A compiled language is one where the program, once compiled, is expressed in the instructions of the target machine. For example, an addition "+" operation in your source code could be translated directly to the "ADD" instruction in machine code.
An interpreted language is one where the instructions are not directly executed by the target machine, but instead read and executed by some other program (which normally is written in the language of the native machine). For example, the same "+" operation would be recognised by the interpreter at run time, which would then call its own "add(a,b)" function with the appropriate arguments, which would then execute the machine code "ADD" instruction.
You can do anything that you can do in an interpreted language in a compiled language and vice-versa - they are both Turing complete. Both however have advantages and disadvantages for implementation and use.
I'm going to completely generalise (purists forgive me!) but, roughly, here are the advantages of compiled languages:
Faster performance by directly using the native code of the target machine
Opportunity to apply quite powerful optimisations during the compile stage
And here are the advantages of interpreted languages:
Easier to implement (writing good compilers is very hard!!)
No need to run a compilation stage: can execute code directly "on the fly"
Can be more convenient for dynamic languages
Note that modern techniques such as bytecode compilation add some extra complexity - what happens here is that the compiler targets a "virtual machine" which is not the same as the underlying hardware. These virtual machine instructions can then be compiled again at a later stage to get native code (e.g. as done by the Java JVM JIT compiler).
A language itself is neither compiled nor interpreted, only a specific implementation of a language is. Java is a perfect example. There is a bytecode-based platform (the JVM), a native compiler (gcj) and an interpeter for a superset of Java (bsh). So what is Java now? Bytecode-compiled, native-compiled or interpreted?
Other languages, which are compiled as well as interpreted, are Scala, Haskell or Ocaml. Each of these languages has an interactive interpreter, as well as a compiler to byte-code or native machine code.
So generally categorizing languages by "compiled" and "interpreted" doesn't make much sense.
Start thinking in terms of a: blast from the past
Once upon a time, long long ago, there lived in the land of computing
interpreters and compilers. All kinds of fuss ensued over the merits of
one over the other. The general opinion at that time was something along the lines of:
Interpreter: Fast to develop (edit and run). Slow to execute because each statement had to be interpreted into
machine code every time it was executed (think of what this meant for a loop executed thousands of times).
Compiler: Slow to develop (edit, compile, link and run. The compile/link steps could take serious time). Fast
to execute. The whole program was already in native machine code.
A one or two order of magnitude difference in the runtime
performance existed between an interpreted program and a compiled program. Other distinguishing
points, run-time mutability of the code for example, were also of some interest but the major
distinction revolved around the run-time performance issues.
Today the landscape has evolved to such an extent that the compiled/interpreted distinction is
pretty much irrelevant. Many
compiled languages call upon run-time services that are not
completely machine code based. Also, most interpreted languages are "compiled" into byte-code
before execution. Byte-code interpreters can be very efficient and rival some compiler generated
code from an execution speed point of view.
The classic difference is that compilers generated native machine code, interpreters read source code and
generated machine code on the fly using some sort of run-time system.
Today there are very few classic interpreters left - almost all of them
compile into byte-code (or some other semi-compiled state) which then runs on a virtual "machine".
The extreme and simple cases:
A compiler will produce a binary executable in the target machine's native executable format. This binary file contains all required resources except for system libraries; it's ready to run with no further preparation and processing and it runs like lightning because the code is the native code for the CPU on the target machine.
An interpreter will present the user with a prompt in a loop where he can enter statements or code, and upon hitting RUN or the equivalent the interpreter will examine, scan, parse and interpretatively execute each line until the program runs to a stopping point or an error. Because each line is treated on its own and the interpreter doesn't "learn" anything from having seen the line before, the effort of converting human-readable language to machine instructions is incurred every time for every line, so it's dog slow. On the bright side, the user can inspect and otherwise interact with his program in all kinds of ways: Changing variables, changing code, running in trace or debug modes... whatever.
With those out of the way, let me explain that life ain't so simple any more. For instance,
Many interpreters will pre-compile the code they're given so the translation step doesn't have to be repeated again and again.
Some compilers compile not to CPU-specific machine instructions but to bytecode, a kind of artificial machine code for a ficticious machine. This makes the compiled program a bit more portable, but requires a bytecode interpreter on every target system.
The bytecode interpreters (I'm looking at Java here) recently tend to re-compile the bytecode they get for the CPU of the target section just before execution (called JIT). To save time, this is often only done for code that runs often (hotspots).
Some systems that look and act like interpreters (Clojure, for instance) compile any code they get, immediately, but allow interactive access to the program's environment. That's basically the convenience of interpreters with the speed of binary compilation.
Some compilers don't really compile, they just pre-digest and compress code. I heard a while back that's how Perl works. So sometimes the compiler is just doing a bit of the work and most of it is still interpretation.
In the end, these days, interpreting vs. compiling is a trade-off, with time spent (once) compiling often being rewarded by better runtime performance, but an interpretative environment giving more opportunities for interaction. Compiling vs. interpreting is mostly a matter of how the work of "understanding" the program is divided up between different processes, and the line is a bit blurry these days as languages and products try to offer the best of both worlds.
From http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-compiled-and-interpreted-programming-languages
There is no difference, because “compiled programming language” and
“interpreted programming language” aren’t meaningful concepts. Any
programming language, and I really mean any, can be interpreted or
compiled. Thus, interpretation and compilation are implementation
techniques, not attributes of languages.
Interpretation is a technique whereby another program, the
interpreter, performs operations on behalf of the program being
interpreted in order to run it. If you can imagine reading a program
and doing what it says to do step-by-step, say on a piece of scratch
paper, that’s just what an interpreter does as well. A common reason
to interpret a program is that interpreters are relatively easy to
write. Another reason is that an interpreter can monitor what a
program tries to do as it runs, to enforce a policy, say, for
security.
Compilation is a technique whereby a program written in one language
(the “source language”) is translated into a program in another
language (the “object language”), which hopefully means the same thing
as the original program. While doing the translation, it is common for
the compiler to also try to transform the program in ways that will
make the object program faster (without changing its meaning!). A
common reason to compile a program is that there’s some good way to
run programs in the object language quickly and without the overhead
of interpreting the source language along the way.
You may have guessed, based on the above definitions, that these two
implementation techniques are not mutually exclusive, and may even be
complementary. Traditionally, the object language of a compiler was
machine code or something similar, which refers to any number of
programming languages understood by particular computer CPUs. The
machine code would then run “on the metal” (though one might see, if
one looks closely enough, that the “metal” works a lot like an
interpreter). Today, however, it’s very common to use a compiler to
generate object code that is meant to be interpreted—for example, this
is how Java used to (and sometimes still does) work. There are
compilers that translate other languages to JavaScript, which is then
often run in a web browser, which might interpret the JavaScript, or
compile it a virtual machine or native code. We also have interpreters
for machine code, which can be used to emulate one kind of hardware on
another. Or, one might use a compiler to generate object code that is
then the source code for another compiler, which might even compile
code in memory just in time for it to run, which in turn . . . you get
the idea. There are many ways to combine these concepts.
The biggest advantage of interpreted source code over compiled source code is PORTABILITY.
If your source code is compiled, you need to compile a different executable for each type of processor and/or platform that you want your program to run on (e.g. one for Windows x86, one for Windows x64, one for Linux x64, and so on). Furthermore, unless your code is completely standards compliant and does not use any platform-specific functions/libraries, you will actually need to write and maintain multiple code bases!
If your source code is interpreted, you only need to write it once and it can be interpreted and executed by an appropriate interpreter on any platform! It's portable! Note that an interpreter itself is an executable program that is written and compiled for a specific platform.
An advantage of compiled code is that it hides the source code from the end user (which might be intellectual property) because instead of deploying the original human-readable source code, you deploy an obscure binary executable file.
A compiler and an interpreter do the same job: translating a programming language to another pgoramming language, usually closer to the hardware, often direct executable machine code.
Traditionally, "compiled" means that this translation happens all in one go, is done by a developer, and the resulting executable is distributed to users. Pure example: C++.
Compilation usually takes pretty long and tries to do lots of expensive optmization so that the resulting executable runs faster. End users don't have the tools and knowledge to compile stuff themselves, and the executable often has to run on a variety of hardware, so you can't do many hardware-specific optimizations. During development, the separate compilation step means a longer feedback cycle.
Traditionally, "interpreted" means that the translation happens "on the fly", when the user wants to run the program. Pure example: vanilla PHP. A naive interpreter has to parse and translate every piece of code every time it runs, which makes it very slow. It can't do complex, costly optimizations because they'd take longer than the time saved in execution. But it can fully use the capabilities of the hardware it runs on. The lack of a separrate compilation step reduces feedback time during development.
But nowadays "compiled vs. interpreted" is not a black-or-white issue, there are shades in between. Naive, simple interpreters are pretty much extinct. Many languages use a two-step process where the high-level code is translated to a platform-independant bytecode (which is much faster to interpret). Then you have "just in time compilers" which compile code at most once per program run, sometimes cache results, and even intelligently decide to interpret code that's run rarely, and do powerful optimizations for code that runs a lot. During development, debuggers are capable of switching code inside a running program even for traditionally compiled languages.
First, a clarification, Java is not fully static-compiled and linked in the way C++. It is compiled into bytecode, which is then interpreted by a JVM. The JVM can go and do just-in-time compilation to the native machine language, but doesn't have to do it.
More to the point: I think interactivity is the main practical difference. Since everything is interpreted, you can take a small excerpt of code, parse and run it against the current state of the environment. Thus, if you had already executed code that initialized a variable, you would have access to that variable, etc. It really lends itself way to things like the functional style.
Interpretation, however, costs a lot, especially when you have a large system with a lot of references and context. By definition, it is wasteful because identical code may have to be interpreted and optimized twice (although most runtimes have some caching and optimizations for that). Still, you pay a runtime cost and often need a runtime environment. You are also less likely to see complex interprocedural optimizations because at present their performance is not sufficiently interactive.
Therefore, for large systems that are not going to change much, and for certain languages, it makes more sense to precompile and prelink everything, do all the optimizations that you can do. This ends up with a very lean runtime that is already optimized for the target machine.
As for generating executables, that has little to do with it, IMHO. You can often create an executable from a compiled language. But you can also create an executable from an interpreted language, except that the interpreter and runtime is already packaged in the exectuable and hidden from you. This means that you generally still pay the runtime costs (although I am sure that for some language there are ways to translate everything to a tree executable).
I disagree that all languages could be made interactive. Certain languages, like C, are so tied to the machine and the entire link structure that I'm not sure you can build a meaningful fully-fledged interactive version
This is one of the biggest misunderstood things in computer science as I guess.
Because interpretation and compilation are completely two different things, which we can't compare in this way.
The compilation is the process of translating one language into another language. There are few types of compilations.
Compiling - Translate high-level language into machine/byte code (ex: C/C++/Java)
Transpiling - Translate high-level language into another high-level language (ex: TypeScript)
Interpretation is the process of actually executing the program. This may happen in few different ways.
Machine level interpretation - This interpretation happens to the code which is compiled into machine code. Instructions are directly interpreted by the processor. Programming languages like C/C++ generate machine code, which is executable by the processor. So the processor can directly execute these instructions.
Virtual machine level interpretation - This interpretation happens to the code which is not compiled into the machine level (processor support) code, but into some intermediate-level code. This execution is done by another software, which is executed by the processor. At this time actually processor doesn't see our application. It just executing the virtual machine, which is executing our application. Programming languages like Java, Python, C# generate a byte code, which is executable by the virtual interpreter/machine.
So at the end of the day what we have to understand is, all the programming languages in the world should be interpreted at some time. It may be done by a processor(hardware) or a virtual machine.
The compilation is just the process of bringing the high-level code we write that is human-understandable into some hardware/software machine-understandable level.
These are completely two different things, which we can't compare. But that terminology is pretty much good to teach beginners how programming languages work.
PS:
Some programming languages like Java have a hybrid approach to do this. First, compile the high-level code into byte code which is virtual-machine readable. And on the fly, a component called the JIT compiler compiles byte-code into machine code. Specifically, code lines that are executed again and again many times are get translated into the machine language, which makes the interpretation process much faster. Because hardware processor is always much faster than virtual interpreter/processor.
How Java JIT compiler works
It's rather difficult to give a practical answer because the difference is about the language definition itself. It's possible to build an interpreter for every compiled language, but it's not possible to build an compiler for every interpreted language. It's very much about the formal definition of a language. So that theoretical informatics stuff noboby likes at university.
The Python Book © 2015 Imagine Publishing Ltd, simply distunguishes the difference by the following hint mentioned in page 10 as:
An interpreted language such as Python is one where the source code is converted to machine code and then executed each time the program runs. This is different from a compiled language such as C, where the source code is only converted to machine code once – the resulting machine code is then executed each time the program runs.
Compile is the process of creating an executable program from code written in a compiled programming language. Compiling allows the computer to run and understand the program without the need of the programming software used to create it. When a program is compiled it is often compiled for a specific platform (e.g. IBM platform) that works with IBM compatible computers, but not other platforms (e.g. Apple platform).
The first compiler was developed by Grace Hopper while working on the Harvard Mark I computer. Today, most high-level languages will include their own compiler or have toolkits available that can be used to compile the program. A good example of a compiler used with Java is Eclipse and an example of a compiler used with C and C++ is the gcc command. Depending on how big the program is it should take a few seconds or minutes to compile and if no errors are encountered while being compiled an executable file is created.check this information
Short (un-precise) definition:
Compiled language: Entire program is translated to machine code at once, then the machine code is run by the CPU.
Interpreted language: Program is read line-by-line and as soon as a line is read the machine instructions for that line are executed by the CPU.
But really, few languages these days are purely compiled or purely interpreted, it often is a mix. For a more detailed description with pictures, see this thread:
What is the difference between compilation and interpretation?
Or my later blog post:
https://orangejuiceliberationfront.com/the-difference-between-compiler-and-interpreter/
Why we do we say that Java is a compiled and interpreted language?
What is the advantage of this (being compiled and interpreted)?
Java is compiled to an intermediate "byte code" at compilation time. This is in contrast to a language like C that is compiled to machine language at compilation time. The Java byte code cannot be directly executed on hardware the way that compiled C code can. Instead the byte code must be interpreted by the JVM (Java Virtual Machine) at runtime in order to be executed. The primary drawback of a language like C is that when it is compiled, that binary file will only work on one particular architecture (e.g. x86).
Interpreted languages like PHP are effectively system independent and rely on a system and architecture specific interpreter. This leads to much greater portability (the same PHP scripts work on Windows machines and Linux machines, etc.). However, this interpretation leads to a significant performance decrease. High-level languages like PHP require more time to interpret than machine-specific instructions that can be executed by the hardware.
Java seeks to find a compromise between a purely compiled language (with no portability) and a purely interpreted language (that is significantly slower). It accomplishes this by compiling the code into a form that is closer to machine language (actually, Java byte code is a machine language, simply for the Java Virtual Machine), but can still be easily transported between architectures. Because Java still requires a software layer for execution (the JVM) it is an interpreted language. However, the interpreter (the JVM) operates on an intermediate form known as byte code rather than on the raw source files. This byte code is generated at compile time by the Java compiler. Therefore, Java is also a compiled language. By operating this way, Java gets some of the benefits of compiled languages, while also getting some of the benefits of interpreted languages. However, it also inherits some limitations from both of these languages.
As Bozho points out, there are some strategies for increasing the performance of Java code (and other byte code languages like .Net) through the use of Just in Time (JIT) compilation. The actual process varies from implementation to implementation based on the requirements, but the end-result is that the original code is compiled into byte code at compile time, but then it is run through a compiler at runtime before it is executed. By doing this, the code can be executed at near-native speeds. Some platforms (I believe .Net does this) save the result of the JIT compilation, replacing the byte code. By doing this, all future executions of the program will execute as though the program was natively compiled from the beginning.
Why do we say Java is compiled and interpreted language.
Because source code (.java files) is compiled into bytecode (.class files) that is then interpreted by a Java Virtual Machine (also known as a JVM) for execution (the JVM can do further optimization but this is anoher story).
What is the advantage over this(being compiled/interpreted)
Portability. The same bytecode can be executed on any platform as long as a JVM is installed ("compile once, run anywhere").
This is a long topic and you'd better read about JIT. In short, Java is compiled to bytecode, and the bytecode is later compiled (in the JVM) to machine code.
Java is considered a "compiled" language because code is compiled into bytecode format that is then run by the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). This gives several advantages in the realm of performance and code optimization, not to mention ensuring code correctness.
It is considered an "interpreted" language because, after the bytecode is compiled, it is runnable on any machine that has a JVM installed. It is in this way that Java is much like an interpreted language in that, for the most part, it doesn't depend on the platform on which is is being run. This behavior is similar to other interpreted languages such as Perl, Python, PHP, etc.
One theoretical downside to the fact that Java programs can be run on any system in absence of the source code is that, while this method of distribution ensures cross-platform compatibility, the developers have one less reason to release their source code, driving a wedge between the ideological meanings of the phrases "cross-platform" and "open source".
Java is compiled, into byte code not binaries. The byte codes are not executable directly, they need the Java Virtual Machine to do a just in time compile and compile them again into machine code at runtime.
At a very basic level, it separate the code that programmers write from the local machine where the JVM operates on, hence better portability. While compiling to bytecode helps the performance of just in time compile, reduce file sizes, and more or less help conceal real code. (it also eliminates some compile time error)
Compiled: Your program is syntactically a correct Java program, before the program starts.
Interpreted: Run on different platforms the same (byte-)code.
Compiled: When your program has compiled correctly you can be shure to have 80% of software bugs under control. And your code will not stop because you have not correctly closed a code block, etc.
Interpreted: You know what Applets are ? It was the "killer" application when Java came out. Your browser downloads the applet from the website and run the applet code in your browser. That is not very cool. But, the same applet runs on Windows, Linux, Macs, Solaris, ... because runs/interpreted an intermedium language: the byte code.
I just started learning Java and I'm confused about the topic of platform independence.
Doesn't "independent" imply that Java code should run on any machine and need no special software to be installed? Yet the JVM needs to be present in the machine.
For example, we need to have the Turbo C Compiler in order to compile C/C++ source code and then execute it. The machine has to have the C compiler.
Could somebody please what is meant when Java is described as "platform independent"?
Typically, the compiled code is the exact set of instructions the CPU requires to "execute" the program. In Java, the compiled code is an exact set of instructions for a "virtual CPU" which is required to work the same on every physical machine.
So, in a sense, the designers of the Java language decided that the language and the compiled code was going to be platform independent, but since the code eventually has to run on a physical platform, they opted to put all the platform dependent code in the JVM.
This requirement for a JVM is in contrast to your Turbo C example. With Turbo C, the compiler will produce platform dependent code, and there is no need for a JVM work-alike because the compiled Turbo C program can be executed by the CPU directly.
With Java, the CPU executes the JVM, which is platform dependent. This running JVM then executes the Java bytecode which is platform independent, provided that you have a JVM available for it to execute upon. You might say that writing Java code, you don't program for the code to be executed on the physical machine, you write the code to be executed on the Java Virtual Machine.
The only way that all this Java bytecode works on all Java virtual machines is that a rather strict standard has been written for how Java virtual machines work. This means that no matter what physical platform you are using, the part where the Java bytecode interfaces with the JVM is guaranteed to work only one way. Since all the JVMs work exactly the same, the same code works exactly the same everywhere without recompiling. If you can't pass the tests to make sure it's the same, you're not allowed to call your virtual machine a "Java virtual machine".
Of course, there are ways that you can break the portability of a Java program. You could write a program that looks for files only found on one operating system (cmd.exe for example). You could use JNI, which effectively allows you to put compiled C or C++ code into a class. You could use conventions that only work for a certain operating system (like assuming ":" separates directories). But you are guaranteed to never have to recompile your program for a different machine unless you're doing something really special (like JNI).
Technical Article on How java is platform indepedent?
Before going into the detail,first you have to understand what is the mean of platform?
Platform consists of the computer hardware(mainly architecture of the microprocessor)
and OS.
Platform=hardware+Operating System
Anything that is platform indepedent can run on any operating system and hardware.
Java is platform indepedent so java can run on any operating system and hardware.
Now question is how is it platform independent?
This is because of the magic of Byte Code which is OS indepedent.
When java compiler compiles any code then it generates the byte code not the machine native code(unlike C compiler). Now this
byte code needs an interpreter to execute on a machine. This interpreter is JVM. So JVM reads that byte code(that is machine indepedent)
amd execute it.
Different JVM is designed for different OS and byte code is able to run on different OS.
In case of C or C++(language that are not platform indepedent) compiler generate the .exe file that is OS depedent so when we
run this .exe file on another OS it will not run because this file is OS depedent so is not compatible with the another OS.
Finally an intermediate OS indepedent Byte code make the java platform independent.
It means the Java programmer does not (in theory) need to know machine or OS details. These details do exist and the JVM and class libraries handle them. Further, in sharp contrast to C, Java binaries (bytecode) can often be moved to entirely different systems without modifying or recompiling.
No, it's the other way around. It's because you use the virtual machine that the Java program gets independend.
The virtual machine is not independent, you have to install one that is specifically made for your type of system. The virtual machine creates an independent platform on top of the operating system.
The JVM is a "simulated machine" that can be installed on different systems. In this way, the same Java code can run on different systems, because it relies on the JVM, not on the operational system itself.
That is to say, this allows the programmer to communicate with the virtual system (JVM) and utilize its functions, instead of the specific machine and OS functions.
Since Java only relies on JVM, it is platform independent (if the platform has JVM installed).
So in short, Java is not platform independent as such, it requires a JVM-installation for all systems it should run on. However, it will run on all systems that has the JVM installed.
Java is platform-independent as it has JVM(Java virtual machine). Let us illustrate it with a real life example. Let's assume you are free to your family members. But why?
Because you know them well and they know you as well. But, you are not free to my family members. Because you don't know them and they don't know you either. But, if I'm your friend and when I can introduce you to my family members, hence you will be able to talk to them freely.
In a similar way, if you are a code and I am a JVM. Also, your family is windows platform and mine is the Linux platform. In the case you were a C or other platform-dependent languages, you only know your family members and vice versa. That's why only the platform on which you were written knows that Code and will support it. But if you are a JAVA code and when you come to my family viz. the Linux platform and if there you find me, JVM, then I can introduce you to my family, the Linux platform and you will be able to interact with it.
For platform-dependent languages, there isn't any friend like JVM available to them to introduce themselves to any platform family. That is how Java is platform-independent. :)
The JVM abstracts from the concrete platform. Your program relies only upon the JVM and since the JVM is available for different platforms like Windows and Linux, your program is platform independent (but jvm depended).
In c/c++ the source code(c program file) after the compilation using a compiler is directly converted to native machine code(which is understandable to particular machine on which u compiling the code). And hence the compiled code of c/c++ can not run on different OS.
But in case of Java : the source file of java(.java) will be compiled using JAVAC compiler(present in JDK) which provides the Byte code(.class file) which is understandable to any JVM installed on any OS(Physical System).
Here we need to have different JVM (which is platform dependent) for different operating Systems where we want to run the code, but the .class file(compiled code/Intermediate code)remains same, because it is understandable to any of the JVM installed on any OS.
In c/c++ : only source code is machine independent.
In Java : both the source code and the compiled code is platform independent.
This makes Java Platform(machine) independent.
java is not platform Independent, itself is a platform,based on that platform java apps runs,but java platform itself is platform dependent
1:jvm(i.e java virtual machine)is a collection of programs which contains lot of files which provides various functionatiles present on a folder(i.e collections of programs on middle level format)as called packages.jvm helps not to be overloaded on o/s where its helps to execute only the .class files or java applications only by itself only.It helps to make its equalities middle level format after compliation by the java compiler then its provide the byte code (.class file)reprsentation which is not specific to o/s and processor .
2:jvm makes byte code to .exe file for proccessor to understandable and prsents memory allocation for every functions after recieving frm byte code.
3:jvm also releases memory alocation from ram after control makes finishes thier execution .
JVM is os dependent.
for every os JVM different.
".class" is same for all JVMs.
so, every JVM understand that ".class" file data.
windows dependent JVM give windows dependent instruction to windows
linux dependent JVM give linux dependent instruction to linux.
that's like it for other operating systems.
so,java runs on any operating system.
that's why java is os independent.
In simple terms:
Java programming language is platform independent.
JVM is platform dependent
Java is not platform independent in that it runs on the JVM. Having said that, you gain platform independence via programming against a single abstract machine that has concrete realizations on most common OS platforms (and some embedded appliances).
A related idea is the hardware abstraction layer present in many operating systems that allows the same OS to run on disparate hardware.
In you original question, Turbo C is analagous to the javac program, and the JVM is the OS/HAL.
Doesn't independent means that Java code should be able to run on any machine and would need no special software to be installed (JVM in this case has to be present in the machine)?
With Java, you can compile source code on Windows and the compiled code (bytecode to be precise) can be executed (interpreted) on any platform running a JVM. So yes you need a JVM but the JVM can run any compiled code, the compiled code is platform independent.
In other words, you have both portability of source code and portability of compiled code.
Like, for example, we need to have Turbo C Compiler in order to compile C/C++ source code and then execute it.. The machine has to have the C compiler.
The machine doesn't have to have a C compiler, the machine has to use a platform specific binary. With C or C++, the compiled code is specific to each architecture, it is platform independent.
In other words, with C / C++ you have portability of source code (with some discipline) but not portability of compiled code: you need to recompile for each architecture into platform specific binaries.
JVM will be platform dependent.
But whatever it will generate that will be platform independent. [which we called as bytecode or simply you can say...the class file]. for that why Java is called Platform independent.
you can run the same class file on Mac as well on Windows but it will require JRE.
bytecode is not plateform independent, but its JVM that makes bytecode independent. Bytecode is not the matchine code. bytecodes are compact numeric codes, constants, and references (normally numeric addresses) which encode the result of parsing and semantic analysis of things like type, scope, and nesting depths of program objects. They therefore allow much better performance than direct interpretation of source code. bytecode needs to be interpreted before execution which is always done by JVM interpreter.
Just a side note to the discussion about JVM and JIT Compilation.
This is the same principle as with C# and the CLR and to some extent in Python, and when somebody says that the code runs "directly on hardware" that is actually true in that instructions that is already compiled will be able to take advantage of optimization on the machine/cpu it's being run on. So even if the initial compilation of a module is rather slow, the next time this module is run, the code being executed runs at native speed and thus runs directly on hardware so to say.
Java is platform independent in aspect of java developer,but this is not the case for the end-user, who need to have platform dependent JVM to run java code. Basically, when java code is compiled, a bytecode is generated which is typically platform independent. Thus, the developer has to have write a single code for entire platform series. But, this benefit comes with a headache for end-user who need to install JVM in order to run this compiled code. This JVM is differnt for every platform. Thus, dependency comes into effect only for end-user.
Javac – compiler that converts source code to byte code.
JVM- interpreter that converts byte code to machine language code.
As we know java is both compile**r & **interpreter based language. Once the java code also known as source code is compiled, it gets converted to native code known as BYTE CODE which is portable & can be easily executed on all operating systems. Byte code generated is basically represented in hexa decimal format. This format is same on every platform be it Solaris work station or Macintosh, windows or Linux. After compilation, the interpreter reads the generated byte code & translates it according to the host machine. . Byte code is interpreted by Java Virtual Machine which is available with all the operating systems we install. so to port Java programs to a new platform all that is required is to port the interpreter and some of the library routines.
Hope it helps!!!
When we compile C source data, it generate native code which can be understood by current operating system.
When we move this source code to the other operating system, it can't be understood by operating system because of native code that means representation is change from O.S to O.S.
So C or C++ are platform dependent .
Now in case of java, after compilation we get byte code instead of native code. When we will run the byte code,
it is converted into native code with the help of JVM and then it will be executed.
So Java is platform independent and C or C++ is not platform independent.
well good question but when the source code is changed into intermediate native byte code by a compiler in which it converts the program into the byte code by giving the errors after the whole checking at once (if found) and then the program needs a interpreter which would check the program line by line and directly change it into machine code or object code and each operating system by default cannot have an java interpreter because of some security reasons so you need to have jvm at any cost to run it in that different O.S platform independence as you said here means that the program can be run in any os like unix, mac, linux, windows, etc but this does not mean that each and every os will be able to run the codes without a jvm which saysspecification, implementation, and instance , if i advance then by changing the configuration of your pc so that you can have a class loader that can open even the byte code then also you can execute java byte code, applets, etc.
-by nimish :) best of luck
{App1(Java code)------>App1byteCode}........{(JVM+MacOS) help work
with App1,App2,App3}
{App2(Java Code)----->App2byteCode}........{(JVM+LinuxOS) help work
with App1,App2,App3}
{App3(Java Code)----->App3byteCode}........{(JVM+WindowsOS) help work
with App1,App2,App3}
How this is happening ?
Ans: JVM have capability to read ByteCode and Response In Accordance with the underlying OS As the JVM is in Sync with OS.
So we find, we need JVM with Sync with Platform.
But the main thing is that the programmer dont have to know specific knowledge of the Platform and program his application keeping one specific platform in mind.
This Flexibility of write Program in Java --- compile to ByteCode and run on any Machine (Yes need to have Platform DEPENDENT JVM to execute it) makes Java Platform Independent.
when we compile java file the .class file of that program is generated that .class file contain the byte code.That byte code is platform independent,byte code can run on any operating system using java virtual machine. platform independence not about only operating system it also about the hardware.
When you run you java application on a 16-bit machine that you made on 32-bit, you do not have to worry about converting the data types according to the target system. You can run your app on any architecture and you will get the same result in each.
Edit: Not quite. See comments below.
Java doesn't directly run on anything. It needs to be converted to bytecode by a JVM.
Because JVMs exist for all major platforms, this makes Java platform-independent THROUGH the JVM.