Re: [arch] VM/Classlibrary interface

[Dalibor Topic]

Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:
Last time I checked, no one, nether me or you, is developing code agains the 
TCK, but to a real JVM. And as hard as we may try, sometimes we end with 
software that depends on unspecified behavior. So it's better try to be "bug 
compatible" too.

If you end up with software that depends on unspecified behaviour, then 
it is either

a) your deliberate decision, then you probably have a very, very good 
reason to tie yourself to the particular revision of the particular 
platform, or

b) an accidental mistake, then you fix the small bug in your code, feel 
better about the quality of your code, and move on.

Neither a nor b requires anyone to be "bug compatible" as a) is not a 
bug in anyone's code, and b) is something you'll want to fix in your 
code, if you care about the quality of your code, rather then working 
around your bugs in everyone's class library code, and breaking other 
people's applications.

Regarding usage of implementation specific classes, I believe that most 
developers using the Java programming language are familar with the 
warnings not to use implementation-specific classes or to rely on their 
behaviour, names, presence or anything esle.

cheers,
dalibor topic