We Keep Coding

Any better options than porting from C# to Java?

I have an existing library written in C# which wraps a much lower-level TCP/IP API and exposes messages coming down the wire from a server (proprietary binary protocol) as .NET events. I also provide method calls on an object which handles the complexities of marshalling convenient .NET types (like System.DateTime) down to the binary encodings and fixed-length structures that the API requires (for outgoing messages to the server). There are a fair number of existing applications (both internally and used by third parties) built on top of this .NET library.
Recently, we've been approached by someone who doesn't want to do all the legwork of abstracting the TCP/IP themselves, but their environment is strictly non-Windows (I assume *nix, but I'm not 100% sure), and they've intimated that their ideal would be something callable from Java.
What's the best way to support their requirements, without me having to:
Port the code to Java now (including an unmanaged DLL that we currently P/Invoke into for decompression)
Have to maintain two separate code-bases going forwards (i.e. making the same bug-fixes and feature enhancements twice)
One thing I've considered is to re-write most of the core TCP/IP functionality once into something more cross-platform (C / C++) and then change my .NET library to be a thin layer on top of this (P/Invoke?), and then write a similarly thin Java layer on top of it too (JNI?).
Pros:
I mostly spend my time writing things only once.
Cons:
Most of the code would now be unmanaged - not the end of the world, but not ideal from a productivity point of view (for me).
Longer development time (can't port C# sockets code to C / C++ as quickly as just porting to Java) [How true is this?]
At this point, the underlying API is mostly wrapped and the library is very stable, so there's probably not a lot of new development - it might not be that bad to just port the current code to Java and then have to make occasional bug-fixes or expose new fields twice in the future.
Potential instability for my existing client applications while the version they're running on changes drastically underneath them. (Off the top of my head I can think of 32/64 bit issues, endianness issues, and general bugs that may crop up during the port, etc.)
Another option I've briefly considered is somehow rigging Mono up to Java, so that I can leverage all of the existing C# code I already have. I'm not too clued up though on how smooth the developer experience will be for the Java developers who have to consume it though. I'm pretty sure that most of the code should run without trouble under Mono (bar the decompression P/Invoke which should probably just be ported to C# anyway).
I'd ideally not like to add another layer of TCP/IP, pipes, etc. between my code and the client Java app if I can help it (so WCF to Java-side WS-DeathStar is probably out). I've never done any serious development with Java, but I take some pride in the fact that the library is currently a piece of cake for a third-party developer to integrate into his application (as long as he's running .NET of course :)), and I'd like to be able to keep that same ease-of-use for any Java developers who want the same experience.
So if anyone has opinions on the 3 options I've proposed (port to Java & maintain twice, port to C and write thin language bindings for .NET and Java or, try and integrate Java and Mono), or any other suggestions I'd love to hear them.
Thanks
Edit: After speaking directly with the developer at the client (i.e. removal of broken telephone AKA Sales Department) the requirements have changed enough that this question no longer applies very well to my immediate situation. However, I'll leave the question open in the hopes that we can generate some more good suggestions.
In my particular case, the client actually runs Windows machines in addition to Solaris (who doesn't these days?) and is happy for us to write an application (Windows Service) on top of the library and provide a much more simplified and smaller TCP/IP API for them to code against. We will translate their simple messages into the format that the downstream system understands, and translate incoming responses back for them to consume, so that they can continue to interface with this downstream system via their Java application.
Getting back to the original scenario after thinking about this for a couple of weeks, I do have a few more comments:
A portable C-based library with different language bindings on top would probably be the way to go if you knew up front that you'd need to support multiple languages / platforms.
On *nix, can a single process host both a Java runtime and a Mono runtime simultaneously? I know in earlier versions of .NET you couldn't have two different .NET runtimes in the same process, but I believe they've fixed this with .NET 4? If this is possible, how would one communicate between the two? Ideally you'd want something as simple as a static method call and a delegate to raise responses with.
If there's no easy direct interface support between Java & Mono (methods & delegates, etc.), one might consider using something like ZeroMQ with Protocol Buffers or Apache Thrift as the message format. This would work in-process, inter-process and over the network because of ZeroMQ's support for different transports.

Spend more time getting the requirements nailed down before deciding on an implementation. Until you know what is required, you don't have any criteria for choosing between designs.
If it's a non-windows environment, it doesn't make sense to have .NET anywhere in there, for example.

If you need something that runs on the Java Virtual Machine but looks a lot like C#, you should check out Stab. This will not help you with P/Invoke and the like but you may find it less work to port your C# code to Java and maintain it.
You should look into Mono though. I expect that all your C# code would run unmodified (except the parts that touch the unmanaged DLL).
I have not used it but jni4net is supposed to allow calling .NET code from Java. If your clients want a Java interface, this may be a solution.
I use Mono on Linux and the Mac all the time even when .NET compatibility is not a priority. I like C# and the .NET libraries and prefer the CLR to the JVM. Mono is MIT/X11 licensed which means that you can use it commercially if you like. Unlike some others, I see no reason to avoid technology championed by Microsoft while favouring technology championed by Oracle and IBM.
Using Mono will not help you with the unmanaged bits, although you can still P/Invoke into a native DLL. You will just have to port that DLL yourself or find some equivalent.
You may also want to look into Mono Ahead of Time compilation.

Have you considered mono? It would most likely support your existing code in the non-windows environment. The trick would be calling it from java, but the mono folks might have something to help you out there, too.

This probably isn't the right solution in your case, but for completeness:
There are a few languages that can target both the JVM and .NET, in particular Ruby (JRuby and IronRuby) and Python (Jython and IronPython). Scala might eventually get there too, although right now the .NET version is a long way behind the JVM version.
Anyway, you could potentially rewrite your library in Ruby or Python and target both runtimes.

If what you really, really want is to be able to code in .NET and have it run on the JVM, you could check out Grasshopper (2015-09: link possibly dead). That is what it is designed to do.
I know the Mainsoft guys have been contributors to Mono over the years. If I remember correctly, they wrote the Visual Basic compiler for Mono.
There is also the C# to Java converter from Tangible. I have heard good things but I have never used it myself.
Also, it does not help your situation much but I should point out Mono for Android.
Mono for Android runs the CLR and the Dalvik VM in parallel. In other words, the C# code you wrote for Android can be calling into Java libraries (like the Android UI for example) and executing as a single app. You had asked about the ability to run .NET and Java code in the same process. Clearly, it can be done.

One thing I've considered is to re-write most of the core TCP/IP functionality once into something more cross-platform (C / C++) and then change my .NET library to be a thin layer on top of this (P/Invoke?), and then write a similarly thin Java layer on top of it too (JNI?).
That's a possibility. On the Java side, you should consider using JNA rather than JNI. (If you use JNI, the C / C++ code needs to be written to use JNI-specific signatures.)
Another possibility is to replace the proprietary binary protocol with something that "just works" with multiple programming languages. This is the kind of problem space where CORBA and similar technologies provide a good solution.

What languages would be a good replacement for Java?

I may be posting a premature question, and maybe I'm just freaking out for no reason, but the way Oracle is handling Java is not very promising. I am a nerd who fell in love with Java from the first sight, and use it all the time in my personal/freelance projects but now I am thinking of a replacement.
I am fluent in C#/VB.NET too but I am looking for something more like:
Open Source
Compiled
Cross-Platform
Object Oriented
Large standard library
Extensive documentation
Web development is a major plus
I was thinking about a compromise: Python/Django for web development (or PHP), and Qt for thick client development. Anyone with better thoughts?

Not so long ago, I decided to explore away from the JVM. I set foot on python, and even though i'm nowhere near the expert/ guru level, I dont regret it. Didn't choose C# (considered it) because I consider it to be more of the same. I alredy know (and like a lot) C++, so python seemed like something new, which is what I was looking for.
It fullfils many of your requirements. Particularly, i'm decided not to learn PHP, so the web frameworks in python came in great.
Not to mention, Python has a large community (also see here), always eager to help and teach, which I consider to be very important.
Just my two cents.

Might be worth loking at the other JVM languages - Clojure and Scala are the two I personally think are most promising.
Yes you are on the JVM, but you're pretty independent from Java the langauage and don't have to use any Sun/Oracle implementations if you don't want to.
Having said that - I think that you are worrying a little too much about Java, too many players (including Oracle!) have too much invested to let it go too far off course.

Try Scala. It looks extremely elegant and promising. Being object oriented and sharing a lot with java in a very concise manner.

Everything you said points to C#, except for the Open Source point.
To fix that, there's Mono.

You could try D. My one-sentence description of why it's an awesome language is that its generic programming/compile-time introspection/template metaprogramming facilities are good enough to give you almost flexibility of a duck-typed language, while its execution speed and static type checking rival or exceed C++ and C#.
I think it meets your requirements quite well.
Open source: The frontend to the reference DMD implementation is open source (the back end isn't due to restrictions beyond the author's control). Work is underway to glue the reference frontend to open source backends such as LLVM (LDC) and GCC (GDC). In the case of D1 (the older version of the language) the LLVM port is fairly mature.
Compiled: D is meant to be compiled to native machine code, i.e. raw, inscrutable hexadecimal numbers.
Cross-platform: The reference DMD compiler supports x86 Windows, Linux, Mac OS X and FreeBSD. GDC and LDC will likely support a lot more CPU architectures.
Object oriented: D isn't a "pure" OO language in the Ruby sense of everything being an object, or in the Java sense of not supporting any other paradigm. It does, however, fully support Java-style OO as a subset of the language, along with procedural and functional style programming.
Large standard library: D1 has Tango, which qualifies. D2 has Phobos, which is not "large" yet by modern standards but is larger than C or C++'s standard lib. However, recently there has been a large interest in contributing and Andrei Alexandrescu (its main designer) has accepted several new contributors, including myself.
Extensive documentation: The standard library and language are reasonably well documented at the Digital Mars website. There's also Andrei Alexandrescu's book "The D Programming Language".
Web development: This is an admitted weakness. D doesn't (yet) have a good web framework, though its native unicode support and excellent generic programming support should make writing one relatively easy.

I too would like another Java-like technology to come along. Lately I've been doing Flex/Actionscript. While I really enjoy it, Actionscript technology seriously lacks the elegance that Java has. Adobe can write some good cross platform APIs, but they just don't have the head capital to build elegant languages and compilers. I've also tried Ruby, but the VM for Ruby is really bad. I've gone back to Java after my flirtation with other technologies and I think it's because the language is good enough, but the JVM is by far the best out there.
So do you want to stay with the JVM or do you really want to the leave the JVM altogether? Staying on the JVM there are lots of options: JRuby, Scala, Groovy, Javascript, Clojure are the big players. However, there are tons of great languages that can take advantage of the JVM's features.
Leaving the JVM there are still good options like python, ruby, and erlang. But you give up some of the nice features of the JVM like performance (big one), and the ability to drop down to a nice language like Java if you need speed. Those others mean using C or nothing at all.
I finally stopped worrying about Java's future. Sun did all it could to screw it up and it still turned out pretty darn good. I think Opensource has a lot more influence over Java's success than Oracle or Sun could ever have had.

I can't post comments yet, so I'm posting an answer related to the Python discussion. Though Python isn't compiled to machine code, there is a Python-to-C compiler called Cython, which can compile nearly all valid Python -- closures are finally (!) in the latest development release. It's have a big impact on some parts of the Python commmunity, e.g., I was at Euroscipy recently, and over half the talks mentioned Cython.

I personally don't like PHP, but it does meet all of your requirements. It doesn't officially support compilation but there is the Hip Hop project which compiles PHP to C code. Facebook is currently heading up this project.
That said, I highly discourage you from using it :)

C# is the only thing that will meet your needs and not feel hopelessly archaic, or frustrate with limited library. For open source/non-windows, use mono. It's a good, mature implementation of most of what's important in the CLR.
Some things (WPF, WCF, etc) are "missing" from mono, but these aren't so much part of the platform as they are windows-specific proprietary toolkits. Some of them are being implemented slowly in mono, some aren't. Coming from java you won't miss them because you're looking for a platform and good standard libraries to build upon, not a gui toolkit or whiz-bang communication framework.
As far as a platform to build stuff with that's "like" java and offers similar levels of functionality, C# + CLR is the clearest option.

Using also Cython you get the best of the two worlds , the ability to code in python , the ability to code in C and C++ and of course compile your code and the ability to use both python a c/c++ libraries out of the box. And if you dont like C++ syntax , cython syntax is python syntax and more.
link text

Implement 3270 protocol in Java

I've got a big problem with IBM HACL for accessing a server which speaks 3270 protocol. The library keeps crashing, and our JNI wrapper is actually a bug-fixing layer for the poorly-implemented and poorly-documented library (and I suspect we have introduced new bugs with it too). Moreover, in our company, everybody knows Java, and could maintain the software if we didn't have the JNI-Layer and the IBM class library.
We have to use the C++ class library, because the IBM Java library is unusable: we get every non-printable character translated, and we lose all control characters along the way.
Now the question is: can we ditch this library and implement our solution in Java completely (we'd like to avoid using another library from another vendor)? Is the protocol well documented? Is the implementation of 3270-over-ssl really so complex?
Thanks.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1041
so i guess its documented (assuming i hit the right doc)
couldnt find a java implementation though, you'd need to code it over telnet, or maybe SSH

I am unfamiliar with the differences between 3270 and 5250 data streams, but there is a 5250 implementation in Java in the tn5250j project available from http://tn5250j.sourceforge.net/
It might be usable for you?
(also there is a 3270 screen scraping project at http://freehost3270.sourceforge.net/ but it appears to be abandoned).

freehost3270 doesn't look as abandoned as it might appear - CVS has changes from 2 years ago. There is always an arguement that good code won't need to be changed that often in any case if the requirements have not altered. There have been complimentary comments wrt to the codebase. If you don't particularly want to work with other vendors products then working with this code/project seems to be your best option.

Freehost is not good code. Do not even bother trying it. There is a reason that it seems dead. JIN TN3270 is better but is incomplete. Ideally you want to find the API that your company's Emulator software uses. I am still searching for one for ours.

Another option would be h3270. It is a Java front-end to the x3270 suite of tools.

Java and GraphicsMagick -- Will it work?

I am considering using GraphicsMagick (http://www.graphicsmagick.org/) in a Java project. Does anyone have any experience with this? Suggestions on how to get started? It seems like there isn't a native Java library so it may be a little more difficult.
Thanks!

We did our project with GraphicsMagick and Java, Q&A here obvious influence our decision. It's a long way but we eventually got it done. We tweaked both GraphicsMagick and im4java very hard to get the performance and reliability we want. Thought I should contribute back:
http://kennethxu.blogspot.com/2013/04/integrate-java-and-graphicsmagick.html

It's definitely possible. Take a look at IM4Java, a Java abstraction around the commandline interfaces of various ImageMagick like tools (including GM) that feels like a language binding. Very little documentation, but sufficiently simple. Obviously your images have to be accessible from the OS (e.g. not inside ResourceBundles).

Currently the only reasonable way to achieve this is by using the command line from Java (runtime.exec). You should use im4java to do this as suggested above. im4java will enable you to build up your "gm command" string using java method calls, it also provides a number of other useful features.
The big advantage of using this technique over actual language bindings is simplicity and reliability. Reliability is important especially if your Java app is running on a Java based server or servlet engine like tomcat. The reason being that a memory fault or other error while using language bindings could bring down the whole Java virtual machine.

How to rewrite or convert C# code in Java code?

I start to write a client - server application using .net (C#) for both client and server side.
Unfortunately, my company refuse to pay for Windows licence on server box meaning that I need to rewrite my code in Java, or go to the Mono way.
Is there any good way to translate C# code in Java ? The server application used no .net specific feature, only cross language tools like Spring.net, Hibernate.net and log4net.
Thanks.

I'd suggest building for Mono. You'll run into some gray area, but overall it's great. However, if you want to build for Java, you might check out Grasshopper. It's a commercial product, but it claims to be able to translate CIL (the output of the C# compiler) to Java bytecodes.

Possible solutions aside, direct translations of programs written in one language to a different language is generally considered a Bad Idea™ -- especially if this translation is done in some automated fashion. Even when done by a "real" programmer, translating an application line by line often results in a less than desirable end result because each language has its own idioms, strengths and weaknesses that require things be done in a slightly different way.
As painful as it may be, it's probably in your best interest and those who have to maintain this application to rewrite it in Java if that's what your employer requires.

I only know the other way. Dbo4 is developed in java and the c# version is generated from the java sources automaticaly.

There is no good way. My recommendation is to start over in Java, or like you said use Mono.

Although I think the first mistake was choosing an implementation language without ensuring a suitable deployment environment, there's nothing that can be done about that now. I would think the Mono way would be better. Having to rewrite code would only increase the cost of the project, especially if you already have a good amount of code written in C#. I, personally, try to avoid rewriting code whenever possible.

Java and C# are pretty close in syntax and semantics. The real problem is the little differences. They will bite you when you dont expect it.

Grasshopper is really the best solution at this time, if the licensing works for you (the free version has some significant limitations). Its completely based on the Mono class libs (which are actually pretty good), but runs on top of standard Java VMs. Thats good as the Java VMs are generally a bit faster and more stable than Mono, in my experience. It does have more weaknesses than Mono when it comes to Forms/Graphics related APIs, as much of this hasn't been ported to Java from the Mono VM, however.
In the cases were it works, it can be wonderful, though. The performance is sometimes even better than when running the same code on MS's VM on Windows. :)

I would say from a maintance stand point rewrite the code. It's going to bring the initial cost of the projet up but would be less labor intensive later for whoever is looking at the code. Like previous posters stated anything automated like this can't do as good as a job as a "real" programmer and doing line by line converting won't help much either. You don't want to produce code later on that works but is hell to maintain.