On ÎÎÎ 25 ÎÎÎ 2004 02:40, Kiyo Inaba wrote: > I am wondering, your patch may reject proper (as far as I know) > file name like 'foo.class.class' to be rejected. Is it illegal to > use names like that?
hi, I just consulted some more knowledgeable people than me on this on irc, here is the discussion (with permission): <markos_> hey, wrt to the last mail from Kiyo Inaba, are class names of the form name.class illegal? (so that the source is name.class.java and the class name is name.class.class) <dalibor> shoot <markos_> i'm pretty sure that they should be illegal, but i'd like to be sure... <dalibor> uh. <markos_> i sent a patch to avdyk, so that kjc would reject a class called with the extension .class (ie java name.class) <dalibor> i don't think name.something.java is a legal file name for javac because it messes up the class lookup <dalibor> as . signifies directories, actually. <dalibor> (exceot the . before java) <markos_> ah, that clarifies it <markos_> i'll quote you in my response :-) <dalibor> you could cc: tromey, too ;) <markos_> i'll cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] <dalibor> sounds good. So, I guess it's ok to reject the extension .class from a class name. _______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
