John Keiser wrote:
> You can add java.beans to the list. It's done and up to 1.1 compliance,
> as far as I have tested it. I haven't run it with the BeanBox, though.
> I figure if we have something working, we may as well include it.
How useful are beans without a working awt?
> java.lang.reflect is going to be totally overhauled for the VM
> requirement. No more VM independence on it; there's really no need for
> it, since the VMs have to implement most of it internally anyway.
What does this mean? You don't think reflection should be included?
> FYI, java.lang's ETA (at least my part) is about a month from now. That
> good enough? The main reason it'll take so long is real life
> considerations crushing my time into nothingness right now.
I was thinking longer than a month, actually. I just wanted to define our
first target release contents so we can focus resources there.
--
*****************************************************
* Aaron M. Renn *
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Homepage: <URL:http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/> *
*****************************************************
