One of the build tools in jdk/make/tools/src might be using some of
the sources in
the jdk/src tree, or processing the sources? I don't recall the exact
details.
In any case, there may be some issue here, sorry I don't recall the
details.
I'm thinking that the more likely scenario is that somehow an older
javac was
used to do the compilation?
If you find the error, and where it happened in the build let me know.
-kto
On Jul 1, 2010, at 5:33 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Am 02.07.2010 02:15, schrieb Jonathan Gibbons:
Ulf,
Have you tried it, and if so, what error do you get?
Sorry, no. It was Martin. I don't know the exact error message.
Building the whole JDK is outside my resources (Windows, labtop,
etc.) :-( .
Anyway thanks for your time.
-Ulf
If you get an error, this may be a fault in the Makefiles for
this part of the system, using the wrong macro to get at javac.
That's what I was trying to get at in my previous message.
However, I'm not an expert on this part of the code, I'm just
trying to explain generalities here. There may be reasons I don't
know about why this needs to be compilable by the BOOT JDK.
Separately, I know at some point, Joe was planning to have a
concerted effort to diamond-ize the JDK code base in areas where
that is technically reasonable (i.e. not javac etc.)
-- Jon
On 07/01/2010 04:51 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Jonathan,
much thanks.
My question is not about the generated parts, it's about following
lines
652 private static Map<String, UnicodeBlock> map
653 = new HashMap<String, UnicodeBlock>(256);
in
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/Character-warnings/src/share/classes/java/lang/Character.java.sdiff.html
where JDK-7 compiler returns a warning: "redundant type arguments
in new expression (use diamond operator instead).".
If coded as:
652 private static Map<String, UnicodeBlock> map = new
HashMap<>(256);
Martin said, this doesn't work, because j.l.Character must be
compilable by the bootstrap JDK which is JDK-6.
This I don't understand in reference to what you said: "... and
all the code in the jdk/ repo can be built with the latest
language features."
-Ulf
Am 02.07.2010 01:22, schrieb Jonathan Gibbons:
Ulf,
As complicated as the build is now, it used to be way more
complicated. I suspect you're just seeing a bit of history
leaking into that part of the build. Because some of the code
in the java.lang.Character area is automatically generated, it
has its own special Makefile rules, so I suspect it has slipped
through the cracks to make sure the files that get generated are
compiled with the latest compiler to -target 7 class files.
-- Jon
On 07/01/2010 04:11 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Jonathan, Kelly,
thanks for your short but excellent descriptive explanation.
It mainly reflects how I understood the build process in general.
Can you briefly answer my questions below?
Am 01.07.2010 18:13, schrieb Kelly O'Hair:
On Jul 1, 2010, at 7:56 AM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 07/01/2010 01:32 AM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Am 01.07.2010 09:38, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 23:49, Ulf Zibis<ulf.zi...@gmx.de>
wrote:
Am 30.06.2010 19:50, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 01:22, Ulf
Zibis<ulf.zi...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 29.06.2010 02:29, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
I tried to do that, but Character.java is one of those
classes
that needs to be compilable by the bootstrap JDK,
so this change ist leider nicht moeglich.
I think, there should be a note about this in the sources
of those
classes.
Such a note is likely to become obsolete soon.
How do you mean that? Will the build procedure change soon.
Then it would be
anyway appropriate to update to new "style".
In jdk8, the bootstrap jdk will be at least jdk7.
It would make me wonder if there wont come new language
extensions.
I was thinking about a comment (in all bootstrap compiled
classes) which couldn't become obsolete like:
"Don't use latest language extensions in this class. It's one
of those which must be compilable by the bootstrap JDK while
building this JDK. Add @suppressWarnings if appropriate."
Anyway, couldn't we use the latest existing JDK-7 build for
bootstrap? Then we could update the sources 2 weeks later.
... or use 2 versions for bootstrap and library as said before.
-Ulf
Ulf,
I suggest you go read blogs by Kelly (http://blogs.sun.com/
kto/) and myself (http://blogs.sun.com/jjg/) on the process of
building the JDK. The boot JDK is always the latest available
FCS product (i.e JDK 6 for JDK 7), but the first thing done in
the build is to build a hybrid javac that runs on the boot JDK
and which understands the latest language. Therefore, with
the exception of javac and related tools that are used during
the bootstrap (e.g. javah) most of the JDK, and all the code
in the jdk/ repo can be built with the latest language features.
I understand this, that all classes in jdk7/tl are compiled by
source=7 level.
Is that correct?
In particular, why should j.l.Character then be compilable by
source=6 level, as Martin said?
If so, is it thinkable to have 2 versions, one for the bootstrap
and one for the final JDK7 library, so the latter would be
"clean" for the source=7 level?
-Ulf
There may however be historical reasons why some classes still
get special treatment; those would need to be examined on a
case by case basis.
I think some of the source generation tools may require a
'dumbing down' of the source, I forget the exact details.
The jdk/make/tools/src tools are supposed to be built with the
BOOT jdk (jdk6), and in general are small utility tools
that need to be run before the jdk7 image exists, but are not
technically part of the jdk7 image.
So like langtools, they need to be BOOT jdk flavored sources,
or have a way to run with a BOOT jdk.
-kto
-- Jon
