Hi You are right Art: there’s no issue for now. We are not in the rush to update. I would just create a Jira to track it for later purpose.
Regards JB Le sam. 18 janv. 2025 à 14:24, Arthur Naseef <artnas...@apache.org> a écrit : > Is the generated code problematic, or are we talking hypotheticals here? > > Not trying to discourage updating - but instead trying to understand need > here: > why does javacc need to be updated? > > Ther javacc grammar file is the original code, and the generated java is an > output of that. If we want to hand-maintain a parser, we probably want > something more readable/maintainable than javacc output. > > Art > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2025, 12:38 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Do we really need to generate this code ? > > > > It's a dependency of the build (not the packages dependency), but it > > could be problematic regarding the code generated for updated JDK > > versions (JDK11 and beyond, especially JDK23 at some point). > > > > As we don't generate the code often, I don't see the benefit compared > > to just having the source. I don't think it's an urgent matter, but > > it's worth keeping this in mind and I think it would be a good idea to > > remove this build dep. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 12:15 AM Christopher Shannon > > <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I don't think there is a good reason to get rid of dependency either, > we > > > absolutely need to be able to build a new version going forward. Just > > > because it hasn't changed doesn't mean it won't. > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 3:20 PM Arthur Naseef <artnas...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > I agree with Justin here. What is the need to remove the dependency > on > > > > javacc - especially since it is build-time only? > > > > > > > > Art > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 1:11 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > In what sense is JavaCC a "dependency of the activemq-client > > package"? > > > > It's > > > > > not a Maven dependency, and it's not shipped with the broker. It's > > simply > > > > > part of the build process and represents a near-zero maintenance > > burden. > > > > > > > > > > I'm against checking in the generated source and removing the > > integration > > > > > with JavaCC for the following reasons: > > > > > > > > > > - You never know what changes will be required in the future. > > Generally > > > > > speaking, you'd want to modify the JavaCC input rather than the > > JavaCC > > > > > output in that case. > > > > > - If there is ever any improvement to JavaCC we won't benefit > from > > it. > > > > > - There is no real downside to keeping the existing structure in > > place. > > > > > > > > > > Artemis uses the same basic process to generate the selector > parser, > > and > > > > it > > > > > uses JavaCC 7.0.13 without issue. > > > > > > > > > > What is the benefit of removing the integration and checking in the > > > > > generated code? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 3:49 AM Ken Liao <kenlia...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Recently, I am diving into the SelectorParser.java generated by > > > > javacc. I > > > > > > am wondering, do we want to keep maintaining javacc as a > > dependency of > > > > > the > > > > > > activemq-client package? > > > > > > > > > > > > In another word, the grammar of the JMS selector hasn't changed > > (last > > > > > time > > > > > > the change made to the grammar definition file SelectorParser.jj > is > > > > > > changing the namespace to jakarta in the main branch). Would it > be > > > > easier > > > > > > to just commit the generated java file as source and remove the > > javacc > > > > > > dependency? > > > > > > > > > > > > If we do want to keep it as a dependency, the latest stable > > release of > > > > > > javacc is version 7. I can upgrade javacc to version 7 to check > if > > it > > > > > > breaks the build and tests. I will create a PR on it soon if > > there's no > > > > > > objection. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Ken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org > > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > > > > > >
