Peter, Dan, Sorry to jump into the middle of the conversation :-)
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Dan Lydick wrote: > > Peter, > > Some good thinking here. In your _next_ e-mail > you wrote, > > > How clean are the separations between packages/groups of packages in > > ClassPath? > > i.e. how possible would it be to use say java.sql.* with another > > implementation of java.lang? I'd like to say that I'm currently doing this. And not just with java.sql.*. In a (insert NDA-covered tape) project I'm on at the moment, the vendor has either removed or crippled a few core packages in their proprietary VM. So far, I have had to source the following packages from GNU Classpath to get 3rd party libs working (and to add missing functionality such as JDBC): java.sql.* java.util.logging.* javax.sql.* javax.transaction.* javax.transaction.xa.* Now, granted there are a lof of interfaces in there, but as things stand these replacements have behaved as 1:1 drop in replacements. (I know that the way Sun has done things, a lot of Java packages aren't really isolated; there is substantial amount of cross package dependency in the core Java API) Thanks, Steph -- ================================================================ Stephane Meslin-Weber Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Software Engineer Web: http://odonata.tangency.co.uk ================================================================
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
