On 22 Mar 2006 10:57:54 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wolfgang == Wolfgang Baer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wolfgang It is not really possible to decide what to rip out.
Wolfgang Distributions already might depend on several stubs for
Wolfgang compilation of libraries.
Yeah,
On 3/23/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm pleasantly surprised; the score (for 1.4 at least) doesn't seem to have
gone
down too far (or, at least, not as far as your comments led me to expect).
However,
after a period of such JAPI growth, it will be interesting to see the
On 21 Mar 2006 17:36:52 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as
Hmm, and it didn't actually work in Japi for some reason anyway. I'll
investigate.
Stuart.
--
http://sab39.dev.netreach.com/
On 21 Mar 2006 17:36:52 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as
Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 21 Mar 2006 17:36:52 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I
Hmm, and it didn't actually work in Japi for some reason anyway. I'll
investigate.
Stuart.
--
http://sab39.dev.netreach.com/
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart Hmm, and it didn't actually work in Japi for some reason
Stuart anyway. I'll investigate.
I didn't check it in yet...? Or do you mean that your own test case
for this didn't work?
BTW, I may have found a japi bug. Yesterday I checked
Stuart From that page: Differences between jdk14 and jdk15 have been
Stuart ignored. Since these are not counted as good OR bad, they may cause
Stuart percentages not to add up to 100%
Thanks. Sorry for the noise.
Tom
Wolfgang == Wolfgang Baer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wolfgang It is not really possible to decide what to rip out.
Wolfgang Distributions already might depend on several stubs for
Wolfgang compilation of libraries.
Yeah, I agree.
We don't let new stubs in, in general -- that's good. Removing
On 20 Mar 2006 11:47:34 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart What's the status on the whole ecj-as-gcc-frontend thing?
It is still being discussed by the GCC Steering Committee. I'm
hopeful that we'll get the go-ahead and be
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew I had no idea that it was this close actually. My naive
Andrew impression was that the license would still be troublesome,
Andrew but I guess GCC being under a GPL+exception (IIRC) solves
Andrew this...
Actually it is just bits of
Tom == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as throws
Stuart NotImplementedException will be reported by Japi as not
On 20 Mar 2006 11:47:34 -0700
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart What's the status on the whole ecj-as-gcc-frontend thing?
It is still being discussed by the GCC Steering Committee. I'm
hopeful that we'll get the go-ahead and be
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew I had no idea that it was this close actually. My naive
Andrew impression was that the license would still be troublesome,
Andrew but I guess GCC being under a GPL+exception (IIRC) solves
Andrew this...
Actually it is just bits of
Tom == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as throws
Stuart NotImplementedException will be reported by Japi as not
On 3/19/06, Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I can figure out, an annotation is pretty much the only way
to get these kinds of methods to get flagged by Japi.
Actually, I figured out (and implemented in Japi) a place where we can
carry a flag on any method without requiring 1.5
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
Tom scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
Tom keep running into them as I dig around :-(
Andrew My gut instinct would be to remove them
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart What's the status on the whole ecj-as-gcc-frontend thing?
It is still being discussed by the GCC Steering Committee. I'm
hopeful that we'll get the go-ahead and be able to have this in GCC
4.2.
Stuart Since gcj
Stuart and ecj are
Tom Tromey writes:
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
Tom scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
Tom keep running into them as I dig around :-(
Andrew My gut
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I like David's idea of a STUB comment.
Stuart Does anyone know if eclipse allows plugging in custom rules to produce
Stuart warnings, and where (if anywhere) there's documentation on how to
Stuart produce such rules?
I don't know.
Eclipse
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as throws
Stuart NotImplementedException will be reported by Japi as not implemented
Stuart in Classpath, in the same
On 3/19/06, Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I can figure out, an annotation is pretty much the only way
to get these kinds of methods to get flagged by Japi.
Actually, I figured out (and implemented in Japi) a place where we can
carry a flag on any method without requiring 1.5
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
Tom scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
Tom keep running into them as I dig around :-(
Andrew My gut instinct would be to remove them
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart What's the status on the whole ecj-as-gcc-frontend thing?
It is still being discussed by the GCC Steering Committee. I'm
hopeful that we'll get the go-ahead and be able to have this in GCC
4.2.
Stuart Since gcj
Stuart and ecj are
Tom Tromey writes:
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
Tom scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
Tom keep running into them as I dig around :-(
Andrew My gut
On 20 Mar 2006 11:45:27 -0700, Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having a list of stubs would be a good start. The ones I fixed this
weekend I ran across by chance; I had no idea we had stubs in AWT at
all.
I like David's idea of a STUB comment.
Does anyone know if eclipse allows plugging
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stuart I believe Classpath already has an unchecked NotImplementedException
Stuart so that's what I used. Any method marked as throws
Stuart NotImplementedException will be reported by Japi as not implemented
Stuart in Classpath, in the same
I'm checking this in.
While looking at java.text.Bidi I found that NumericShaper was just
stubs. I've implemented and documented it. I also added a Mauve test
for it.
Note that the JDK won't fully pass the Mauve test, as it fails to
specially handle languages which do not have a digit zero.
Tom Tromey wrote:
We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
keep running into them as I dig around :-(
I've spotted a few in javax.swing also. For those that can't be
implemented straight away, how
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 21:36 +, David Gilbert wrote:
Tom Tromey wrote:
We need to declare war on stubs. They improperly inflate our japi
scores and blind us to the real state of Classpath. Also I seem to
keep running into them as I dig around :-(
I've spotted a few in javax.swing
On 3/19/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the interface problem you mention is the most obvious, but I
think this should be solvable by declaring the class abstract (which
shows up in JAPI too).
It's a shame that we can't use annotations on the trunk; it wouldn't
be hard
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 19:58 -0500, Stuart Ballard wrote:
On 3/19/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the interface problem you mention is the most obvious, but I
think this should be solvable by declaring the class abstract (which
shows up in JAPI too).
It's a shame
On 3/19/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm only thinking about this for interfaces, where e.g. part of the
interface is implemented, the rest is stubbed. You remove the stubs,
and declare the rest abstract so it will at least compile (and be
comparable). Yes, it will break
On 3/19/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the interface problem you mention is the most obvious, but I
think this should be solvable by declaring the class abstract (which
shows up in JAPI too).
It's a shame that we can't use annotations on the trunk; it wouldn't
be hard
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 19:58 -0500, Stuart Ballard wrote:
On 3/19/06, Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the interface problem you mention is the most obvious, but I
think this should be solvable by declaring the class abstract (which
shows up in JAPI too).
It's a shame
36 matches
Mail list logo
