Hello Miguel
Thank you for your recent contribution to Harmony project!
I've noticed that class javax.crypto.Util invokes a method
from undocumented package sun.misc.*
I assume that you did not have access to Sun sources, so it probably
would be good if you provide a link to how did you learn ab
Tim, thanks for your helpful summary.
Original Message
From: Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Apparently from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Understanding the Harmony Laucher.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 15:42:06 +0100
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lemme get the last corners of basic execution done, then
that is _very_ much at the top of the list, especially its native
calls.
Dan Lydick
> [Original Message]
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 4/5/06 9:02:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Starting my next round on BootJVM
>
>
>
Enrico,
Are you able to compile this latest source level?
Whether you can or not, would you mind to send
me your MS project and MS workspace files
(I forget if this is the right name on VS. Maybe
this is just Eclipse nomenclature.) I would like
to look at using your settings as the starting
poi
Mark, thank you for your note - fixed.
Thanks,
Stepan.
On 4/5/06, Mark Hindess wrote:
>
> Stepan,
>
> Thanks, this fixed the problems I was seeing.
>
> However, looking at your commit, I'd have preferred to import the
> depends.xml and refer to junit as ../../${junit.dir} to reduce
> coupling so
Dmitry M. Kononov (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-308?page=all ]
Dmitry M. Kononov updated HARMONY-308:
--
Attachment: test9.java
java.nio.charset.Charset.encode(CharBuffer) returns bytes in a different order
in Har
Oliver Deakin wrote:
ok, I'll ask there about removing 1.5 dependencies from java.rmi and
compile it to get 1.4 bytecode...
I hope that you would not have to remove too much when compiling to 1.4
bytecodes - I guess this is something we still need to investigate. Have
you tried building the r
Tim Ellison wrote:
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Oliver Deakin wrote:
What I mean to say is that the behaviour when the function is called
without a pending exception is unspecified, and in that case I think it
makes most sense to match the RI.
Let's say that I disagree to *impose* mat
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> Oliver Deakin wrote:
>> What I mean to say is that the behaviour when the function is called
>> without a pending exception is unspecified, and in that case I think it
>> makes most sense to match the RI.
>
>
> Let's say that I disagree to *impose* matching the RI's behavi
Oliver Deakin wrote:
> What I mean to say is that the behaviour when the function is called
> without a pending exception is unspecified, and in that case I think it
> makes most sense to match the RI.
Let's say that I disagree to *impose* matching the RI's behavior for
undefined JNI code on Harm
On 4/3/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anton Avtamonov wrote:
> > On 4/3/06, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [SNIP]
> >> Personally, I'd raise JIRA's one at a time when you have fixes
> >> prepared. That way they can be discussed and we can firm up our
> >> policy on match
Magnusson, Geir wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 7:54 AM
>> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [classlib] Switching to a 5.0 compiler
>>
>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>>> 2006/4/5, George Harley <[EM
Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Robert Lougher wrote:
>> It's all very well bombing out with an assertion failure, but to the
>> average end-user it's still the VMs fault, especially if it works with
>> other runtimes (i.e. Suns).
>
> Sure.. sometimes theory gets trumped by practice. Then you have to decide
Archie Cobbs wrote:
Oliver Deakin wrote:
The word "pragmatic" springs to mind. FWIW, JamVM will print nothing
if no exception is pending. It didn't do this originally -- it blew
up with a SEGV. I changed it because a user reported an application
which didn't work with JamVM but it did with
Oliver Deakin wrote:
The word "pragmatic" springs to mind. FWIW, JamVM will print nothing
if no exception is pending. It didn't do this originally -- it blew
up with a SEGV. I changed it because a user reported an application
which didn't work with JamVM but it did with Suns VM (can't remember
Robert Lougher wrote:
The word "pragmatic" springs to mind. FWIW, JamVM will print nothing
if no exception is pending. It didn't do this originally -- it blew
up with a SEGV. I changed it because a user reported an application
which didn't work with JamVM but it did with Suns VM (can't remembe
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> Magnusson, Geir wrote:
>> Maybe you could tell them about "source=1.5 target=jsr14" given that's
>> the behavior of the Sun's.
>
> Of course, pushing the patch upstream has precedence on my previous
> solution. How silly of me not to have suggested that first!
I wouldn't
Yes, that would work.
Regards,
Tim
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> my point is that we could hack the Eclipse batch compiler to make it do
>> something it is not meant to do (source=1.5 target=1.4). If we get
>> burnt then we'll have nobody to complain to ;-)
>> ...
>> As it stands
Robert Lougher wrote:
It's all very well bombing out with an assertion failure, but to the
average end-user it's still the VMs fault, especially if it works with
other runtimes (i.e. Suns).
Sure.. sometimes theory gets trumped by practice. Then you have to decide
which is less work: convincing
Daniel Gandara wrote:
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Daniel,
The new VME is still at the 1.4 level, but with updated VM and kernel
classes. As I have mentioned, two of the main reasons for this VME
update was to allow for package renaming to go ahead, and also to
allow String to be removed from the ker
Hi,
One last point. We're talking about a single if statement here, in a
call which outputs to the screen. The overhead is miniscule.
Rob.
On 4/5/06, Robert Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The word "pragmatic" springs to mind. FWIW, JamVM will print nothing
> if no exception is pending.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello there,
> First, I want to apologise for my english which is not my natural language
> and
> for all the times I chatted during english lessons at school.
Hi Hadrien, good to meet you. Please don't apologize -- I'd be useless
if we were doing this in French, Russ
The word "pragmatic" springs to mind. FWIW, JamVM will print nothing
if no exception is pending. It didn't do this originally -- it blew
up with a SEGV. I changed it because a user reported an application
which didn't work with JamVM but it did with Suns VM (can't remember
which application, it
Tim Ellison wrote:
Understood -- my point is that "blowing up" and "corrupting internal
data structures" is not something you would do by design.
Agreed. By using assertions you get the best of both worlds.
Assertions are especially useful for detecting badly behaving
JNI native code, which can
Understood -- my point is that "blowing up" and "corrupting internal
data structures" is not something you would do by design.
So what does SableVM do if I call ExceptionDescribe() with no pending
exception?
I changed the launcher because I agree that JNI code shouldn't
misbehave, but making Sabl
Tim Ellison wrote:
So what should a VM do if somebody calls ExceptionDescribe() and there
is no pending exception?
(a) blow up
(b) silently ignore it, since there is nothing to describe
(c) print out something along the lines of 'no exception'
FWIW, here is what JCHEVM will do:
If assertion
bootjvm wrote:
All,
After some piecemeal fits and starts on the BootJVM code, I am
about ready to get started on another round. I am checking in
the opcode work that brings this JVM to a place of basic functioning
except for the ATHROW opcode, which is my first order of business
with this ro
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Daniel,
The new VME is still at the 1.4 level, but with updated VM and kernel
classes. As I have mentioned, two of the main reasons for this VME update
was to allow for package renaming to go ahead, and also to allow String to
be removed from the kernel, making kernel impl
Magnusson, Geir wrote:
> Maybe you could tell them about "source=1.5 target=jsr14" given that's
> the behavior of the Sun's.
Of course, pushing the patch upstream has precedence on my previous
solution. How silly of me not to have suggested that first!
Etienne
--
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D.
Tim Ellison wrote:
> my point is that we could hack the Eclipse batch compiler to make it do
> something it is not meant to do (source=1.5 target=1.4). If we get
> burnt then we'll have nobody to complain to ;-)
> ...
> As it stands we have no option to use the Eclipse batch compiler
> (without tw
Enrico Migliore wrote:
> As far as I can say, the main problem of porting a JVM, designed for
> UNIX, to the Windows environment are the ANSI signals:
> Windows, in fact, doesn't honor not even a fourth of all ANSI signals,
> therefore, the JVM signals handler WILL NOT be called by Windows.
You sh
Hi Enrico,
This is great! My hope would be, eventually, to have SableVM to also
build using Microsoft's compiler. The "switch threaded" interpreter
(./configure --with-threading=switch) avoids using any GCC extension in
order to remain pure ISO C. My main problem is that I do not have a
Windows
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 7:54 AM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [classlib] Switching to a 5.0 compiler
>
> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> > 2006/4/5, George Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Hi,
>
Sorry about posting from outlook..
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 7:52 AM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [classlib] Switching to a 5.0 compiler
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Cool - I assume you can make the new version available before we make
changes to the classlib? IOW, make both available and known to the
project (so developers on the project can work on the changes) and
then when we get our stuff done, we'll point users to the new ver
hi folks,
I've just built SableVM and Classpath-0.20 on Cygwin without problems
and the HelloWorld console application runs perfectly :-)
While waiting for the VMI interface to be ready, I'm gonna do the
following steps:
1. Try to enable the -no-cygwin GCC flag
2. Try to setup the mingw env
Hi Dan,
I built BootJVM with MSVC in November 2005 but, as you told me, bootJVM
couldn't run any Java application because it was not completed yet.
Enrico,
That is great news! Could you work with me to produce
MSVS project and workspace files for this, please?
At the moment I'm working o
Daniel,
The new VME is still at the 1.4 level, but with updated VM and kernel
classes. As I have mentioned, two of the main reasons for this VME
update was to allow for package renaming to go ahead, and also to allow
String to be removed from the kernel, making kernel implementation
easier fo
These old guys ... huh
I think I can remove the proposed label from the doc now, right?
http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/classlibrary/pkgnaming.html
Regards,
Tim
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> for giggles and grins, did we really reach a conclusion to use
> "internal"? I'm not chal
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> 2006/4/5, George Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Using the Sun 5.0 javac with the "jsr14" target it is possible to do a
>> complete compile of the Harmony Java source and successfully run the
>> tests on the existing VME. That means we could add in more contribution
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> A while ago we agreed to switch to a class library compilation story
>> that would allow us to use 1.5 Java syntax on a 1.4-compatible VM (i.e.
>> using syntax that is erased by the compiler).
>>
>> Here's where I'm at...
>>
>>
>> Using the Sun compi
Enrico,
That is great news! Could you work with me to produce
MSVS project and workspace files for this, please? I
would like to begin a general migration into this environment
and I will need to ask you a few questions so as to be able
to run the configurator (perhaps once on CygWin or Linix
a
2006/4/5, George Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> Using the Sun 5.0 javac with the "jsr14" target it is possible to do a
> complete compile of the Harmony Java source and successfully run the
> tests on the existing VME. That means we could add in more contributions
> that depended on 5.0 lang
Hi,
Using the Sun 5.0 javac with the "jsr14" target it is possible to do a
complete compile of the Harmony Java source and successfully run the
tests on the existing VME. That means we could add in more contributions
that depended on 5.0 language features being understood instead of
letting t
On 4/5/06, Etienne Gagnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that using Sun's javac and Eclipse with their undocumented and
> unsupported options during the "transition period" seems the cleanest
> strategy for both class library and VM maintenance. I see no trouble
> having such a dependency fo
Look at mail thread 'Location for API extensions'
Actually there were some contradictions remained but not
around 'internal' as I see.
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/5, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> for giggles and grins, did we really reach a conclusion to use
> "internal"? I'm not challeng
I think that using Sun's javac and Eclipse with their undocumented and
unsupported options during the "transition period" seems the cleanest
strategy for both class library and VM maintenance. I see no trouble
having such a dependency for a limited period of time (a few months).
Etienne
Geir Mag
bootjvm wrote:
All,
After some piecemeal fits and starts on the BootJVM code, I am
about ready to get started on another round. I am checking in
the opcode work that brings this JVM to a place of basic functioning
except for the ATHROW opcode, which is my first order of business
with this rou
By specification, the general contract for misbehavior of JNI code is
"undefined VM behavior", which can mean anything from "blow up" to
"corrupt internal data structures":
11.8.1 No Checking for Programming Errors
The JNI functions do not check for programming errors. Passing illegal
argument
for giggles and grins, did we really reach a conclusion to use
"internal"? I'm not challenging you as much asking for help with my
failing memory...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mloenko
Date: Wed Apr 5 04:27:45 2006
New Revision: 391586
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391586&view
George Harley wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
not yet :) Is this holding up something (besides the other approach?)
Hi,
Hopefully once we have agreed on an approach then we can start running
all of the tests that are currently not being run.
For the other approach I have hacked together
Cool - I assume you can make the new version available before we make
changes to the classlib? IOW, make both available and known to the
project (so developers on the project can work on the changes) and then
when we get our stuff done, we'll point users to the new version?
geir
Oliver Deaki
Tim Ellison wrote:
A while ago we agreed to switch to a class library compilation story
that would allow us to use 1.5 Java syntax on a 1.4-compatible VM (i.e.
using syntax that is erased by the compiler).
Here's where I'm at...
Using the Sun compiler:
Specifying source=1.5 and target=1.4 (
A while ago we agreed to switch to a class library compilation story
that would allow us to use 1.5 Java syntax on a 1.4-compatible VM (i.e.
using syntax that is erased by the compiler).
Here's where I'm at...
Using the Sun compiler:
Specifying source=1.5 and target=1.4 (understandably) fails a
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Hi all,
I'm pleased to announce that a new IBM VME will be made available soon
at:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/harmony/index.html
The new VME downloads are named Harmony-vme-win.IA32-v2.zip and
Harmony-vme-linux.IA32-v2.tar.gz. I would like to stress
Stepan, Thanks for picking this up.
This patch is trivial so it doesn't really matter, but I should
mention that I'm keeping up to date versions of all my outstanding
JIRA patches against the current trunk - i.e. resolving clashes,
applying file renames, etc. While I don't want to spam everyone b
Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Etienne Gagnon wrote:
>> It seems that the launcher assumes that it is OK to call
>> (*env)->ExceptionDescribe() even when there is no pending exception.
>
> Definitely sounds like a bug (in the launcher) to me.
I've modified the launcher to behave better.
So what should a
57 matches
Mail list logo
