Hi,
On 4/9/07, Robert Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 4/8/07, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Lougher writes:
>
> >
> > Anyway, I've found what it broke and my original analysis. After
> > putting this in, BeanShell GUI stopped working with JamVM. This was
Hi Andrew,
On 4/8/07, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Lougher writes:
>
> Anyway, I've found what it broke and my original analysis. After
> putting this in, BeanShell GUI stopped working with JamVM. This was
> found during 0.93 testing:
>
>
...
> I don't know where th
Hi Twisti,
On 4/8/07, Christian Thalinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 23:00 +0100, Robert Lougher wrote:
> Anyway, I've found what it broke and my original analysis. After
> putting this in, BeanShell GUI stopped working with JamVM. This was
> found during 0.93 testing:
>
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 23:00 +0100, Robert Lougher wrote:
> Anyway, I've found what it broke and my original analysis. After
> putting this in, BeanShell GUI stopped working with JamVM. This was
> found during 0.93 testing:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/classpath@gnu.org/msg13811.html
>
> I di
Robert Lougher writes:
>
> Anyway, I've found what it broke and my original analysis. After
> putting this in, BeanShell GUI stopped working with JamVM. This was
> found during 0.93 testing:
>
>
...
> I don't know where the problem lies. The class
> "java.util.Hashtable$HashEntry" i
Hi,
On 4/8/07, Robert Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Mark,
On 4/8/07, Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 12:53 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> > Grrr, I hate this access checks. I'll try to fix that _again_.
>
> This seems to be pretty subtle and we fou
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 22:41 +0100, Robert Lougher wrote:
> Strangely enough, I _did_ fix this in JamVM 1.4.4, but then removed
> the checks again in JamVM 1.4.5!
>
> http://cvs.berlios.de/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/jamvm/jamvm/src/reflect.c.diff?r1=1.9&r2=1.10
>
> If I remember the reason for removing i
Mark Wielaard writes:
> On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 12:53 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> > Grrr, I hate this access checks. I'll try to fix that _again_.
>
> This seems to be pretty subtle and we found multiple runtimes (jamvm,
> cacao, gcj and kaffe at least) that seem to get this wrong. And
Hi Mark,
On 4/8/07, Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 12:53 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> Grrr, I hate this access checks. I'll try to fix that _again_.
This seems to be pretty subtle and we found multiple runtimes (jamvm,
cacao, gcj and kaffe at least) that
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 23:12 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Attached is a simplified test case (3 classes - c1 is in package p1, c2
> and c3 are in package p2, c2 is not public, p1.c1 is the entry point)
> that should throw an IllegalAccessException on the line:
> m.invoke(o, new Object[0]);
Sun's
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 12:53 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> Grrr, I hate this access checks. I'll try to fix that _again_.
This seems to be pretty subtle and we found multiple runtimes (jamvm,
cacao, gcj and kaffe at least) that seem to get this wrong. And the
online documentation is not very
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 23:49 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 00:51 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > FAIL: javax.swing.TransferHandler.createTransferable
> > (I thought this was fixed with Francis latest patch, but builder still
> > has trouble with it for some reason)
>
> This ha
Hi,
> FAIL: javax.swing.TransferHandler.createTransferable
> (I thought this was fixed with Francis latest patch, but builder still
> has trouble with it for some reason)
>
> FAIL:
> javax.swing.table.JTableHeader.AccessibleJTableHeader.AccessibleJTableHeaderEntry.getFont
> (Not investigated yet)
13 matches
Mail list logo