-----Original Message----- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raffael Herzog Sent: 15 September 2004 12:13 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: avalon-meta Plugin and Java 5.0
[Parse errors with Java5 constructs in avalon-meta-plugin-1.4]
The difference between theory and practice is a patch!
Any chance you could:
a) provide details of the 1.5 issues b) provide a 1.3-1.5 complaint patch
Either option will be highly appreciated ((b) more than (a) but (a)'s still an interesting scenario).
OK, I'll go for (a) because looking deeper into it, I saw that the problem is actually within QDox and has nothing to do with the avalon-meta plugin itself.
First I edited project.xml to use QDox 1.5 instead of 1.3, because I saw that 1.5 supports parsing of generics in the change log. I was hoping that the change log was just incomplete, but unfortunately, I was wrong.
So, these are my observations (using QDox 1.5):
1. Annotations:
@JMXDomain(value="MyDefaultDomain")
@JMXProperties(value={"type=Generator"})
public class Generator
implements Serviceable,
Configurable,
Initializable,
Disposable,
MBeanable,
GeneratorMBean-> Parse error
2. Varargs:
public void setDescription(String description,
XResourceBundle bundle,
Object... args)
{
this.description = new StringHolder(description, bundle, args);
}-> Parse error
3. Enhanced for-loop:
for ( int i: new int[] { 1, 2, 3 } ) {
System.out.println(i);
}-> OK
4. Generics:
private List<String> l = new ArrayList<String>();
-> OK
5. Type-safe enumerations:
public enum Severity { DEBUG, INFO, WARNING, ERROR }-> OK
I didn't test autoboxing/unboxing and static imports as they definitely should not pose any problem to the parser.
It seems like we'll have to wait for the next QDox release which will hopefully be able to handle the offending constructs. Another option would be to move the avalon-meta-plugin to XDoclet because this one uses the doclet API and should therefore work nicely with Java5 sources (assuming that the JavaDoc API is backwards compatible and the current JavaDoc parser is able to handle Java5 sources :). However, I don't think that Java will undergo such profound syntax changes in the near future again, so it would probably not be worth the trouble of moving the plugin to a different framework.
cu, Raffi
--
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference, but in practice, there is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
