Tim Ellison wrote:
So in OSGi R4 you can export/import individual classes as well as entire
packages?
No, but you can include/exclude classes from a package, sort of like
selecting files in Ant.
What do you mean by 'mandatory attributes'? Is this a conditional
export/import?
Bette
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> I assume that what we really need is two kinds of component export,
>> the public app level API (java.util.*) and a public-yet-not-for-app-
>> but-fellow-traveler API, such as what other conspiring modules would
>> export to each other to p
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I assume that what we really need is two kinds of component export,
the public app level API (java.util.*) and a public-yet-not-for-app-
but-fellow-traveler API, such as what other conspiring modules would
export to each other to provide the full public API.
Kind
On Jul 25, 2005, at 7:00 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Tim" == Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Just some random thoughts on this.
Tim> The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
Tim> components that we should declare with well-defined
interface
Tom Tromey wrote:
>>"Tim" == Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Just some random thoughts on this.
>
> Tim> The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
> Tim> components that we should declare with well-defined interfaces to other
> Tim> components (I'm thinki
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 17:01 +0500, usman bashir wrote:
> i am looking over this and really appreciate a quick response. and one
> thing i want to add up, i would really like to see improvements in
> Javax.sound packages
Sorry, it is getting late already. I wanted to go over the whole list
> "Tim" == Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Just some random thoughts on this.
Tim> The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
Tim> components that we should declare with well-defined interfaces to other
Tim> components (I'm thinking of OSGi bundles here).
In mos
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 16:17 +0200, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
> Actually, it underestimates the number of errors. For binary
> compatibility the results are still valid though. The differences really
> only matter for source level (and to a limited degree reflection)
> compatibility.
Really? Ok. I got
Sven de Marothy wrote:
> Please observe that JAPItools isn't fully 1.5-compatible
> (read: problems with generics, I think), so it reports more
> errors than what's actually there.
Actually, it underestimates the number of errors. For binary
compatibility the results are still valid though. The d
Mark,
Classpath does have an "inofficial" JAPI comparison against 1.5,
it's right here:
http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-jdk15-classpath.html
Please observe that JAPItools isn't fully 1.5-compatible (read: problems
with generics, I think), so it reports more errors than what's actually
Maybe put "text" into
that group (who consistently & correctly remembers whether Locale is in
text or util? :-)).
There is a wad of logic to get right for the bidi, word/line/sentence
boundary detection, etc. I can imagine a world with updates required
here that are independent of ot
Ian Darwin wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>
>> Here's a list of the packages in J2SE 5.0, and my strawman grouping of
>> packages into 'components' (terminology to be agreed :-) ).
>>
>> The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
>> components that we should declare with well-de
Thnx Mark!
i am looking over this and really appreciate a quick response. and one
thing i want to add up, i would really like to see improvements in
Javax.sound packages of sun (just recent headache faced so bit curious about
it) and as well as no one offering much support in JMF (i should say
Tim Ellison wrote:
Here's a list of the packages in J2SE 5.0, and my strawman grouping of
packages into 'components' (terminology to be agreed :-) ).
The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
components that we should declare with well-defined interfaces to other
componen
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> I believe kaffe.org has some 1.5 comparisons.
See
http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-jdk15-classpath-generics.html
for the status of the generics branch, and
http://www.kaffe.org/~stuart/japi/htmlout/h-jdk15-classpath.html for the
status of classpath HEAD branch.
T
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 15:24 +0500, usman bashir wrote:
> I have question to mark! which is missing in ClassPath, just an bird eye
> answer :)
Quick answer. Really busy at the moment. I wanted to thank Tim for
pushing for "a harmonious and inclusive community" and just pointing out
concrete g
I have question to mark! which is missing in ClassPath, just an bird eye
answer :)
On 7/22/05, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here's a list of the packages in J2SE 5.0, and my strawman grouping of
> packages into 'components' (terminology to be agreed :-) ).
>
> The goal is to (a)
Here's a list of the packages in J2SE 5.0, and my strawman grouping of
packages into 'components' (terminology to be agreed :-) ).
The goal is to (a) stimulate discussion, and (b) think about the
components that we should declare with well-defined interfaces to other
components (I'm thinking of OS
18 matches
Mail list logo
