On Tue, 24 Nov 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Having it "fixed" in 1.2 won't help us, as Jikes is designed to run with
> all but most ancient JDK's. You supply the classes.zip (or jar, or
> whatever), we provide the bytecode. Sigh.
I imagine you'll think of a switch such as +1.2 to give it 1.2
On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 14:28:53 +0200, Jaco Greeff wrote:
>> Actually, in JDK 1.1, CLASSPATH does not need to be set to
>> get the core Java classes.zip file. The Java wrapper does that.
>
>Ok. That makes sense. I actually found this out without even trying and was
>quite surprised!
>
>> The othe
> Actually, in JDK 1.1, CLASSPATH does not need to be set to
> get the core Java classes.zip file. The Java wrapper does that.
Ok. That makes sense. I actually found this out without even trying and was
quite surprised!
> The other thing that would be good is a standard place to put
> jar/zi
On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 07:38:11 +0200, Jaco Greeff wrote:
>> Having it "fixed" in 1.2 won't help us
>
>Sorry for the total ignorance, but I've been hearing a lot about the
>CLASSPATH that doesn't need to be set in 1.2. Is this true? Where does
>"java" (1.2) look for the jar/zip/class files then? Or
> Having it "fixed" in 1.2 won't help us
Sorry for the total ignorance, but I've been hearing a lot about the
CLASSPATH that doesn't need to be set in 1.2. Is this true? Where does
"java" (1.2) look for the jar/zip/class files then? Or will it still need to
be specified?
Ok, doesn't have anythin
Having it "fixed" in 1.2 won't help us, as Jikes is designed to run with
all but most ancient JDK's. You supply the classes.zip (or jar, or
whatever), we provide the bytecode. Sigh.
dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ibm.com/research/jikes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sinz writes:
>
> CLASSPATH, as it is currently implemented by various JVMs, JDKs, and
> browsers is, IMHO, one of the most confusing, broken, and expensive
> problems in Java (expensive in the cost of support and the like)
>
> I couldn't agree more. It's the most freque
