Paul Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Well I've played with my script a bit more (just to make it more
> > hideous of course!) and I now have it trying to determine what is
> > different about our classes versus the JDK using javap.
>
> Your script should ignore differences wrt methods marked as
> synchronized.
>
> Non-public classes should be entirely ignored.
I'll change it to not look at protected in a moment.
> > Enough is different that I'm wondering if these results are even
> > useful.
>
> Yes. It looks useful.
>
> > I'm wondering if Kaffe uses any automated method of determining
> > signature compliance for public classes, functions, and data.
>
> I believe the Kaffe people believe that using javap to grab signature
> headers would break their clean-room environment.
Does it break clean-room to examine the public API in this manner?
Brian
--
|-------------------------------|Software Engineer
|Brian Jones |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |http://www.nortel.net
|http://www.classpath.org/ |------------------------------
