Paul Fisher wrote:
>
> Chris Toshok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > At some level, purity of implementation has to give way to the
> > utility of the implementation. I mean, it'll be nice when classpath
> > works, but what happens if lots of code out there won't work with
> > it?
>
> Purity does not need to give way to utility. GNU Classpath will run
> programs which conform to Sun's public API. If someone has written
> code which depends on undocumented classes/methods/fields, then that's
> their fault.
Are you sure you want to take this attitude? It seems a bit heavy
handed. I mean, you're providing a service to developers. Why not make
it easier for them to do their work?
> Once the ISO spec for Java rolls around, I seriously doubt that the
> only two class libraries in existence will be ours and Sun's.
And they will all have to deal with this. Remember, Motif was an X/Open
spec, and we still had to support the use of their protected fields.
xtoph
