Etienne,
I didn't mean that every Harmony JVM should follow OPEN interface. It
is not necessary to implement but maybe JVMs can benefit from
following it (or any kind of standard interface accepted by the
community). It is just a proposal with some simple ideas behind it:
First, JVM should be
+1
-Mark
On 30 May 2006 at 20:06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class
+ 1
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject (provide reason below)
Lets let this
+1
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject (provide
2006/5/25, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
We also agreed to put only internationalized messages and
to have a single catalog by module.
Yep, that's a good task for somebody who is looking for a simple way to
contribute to Harmony's classlibs.
If anyone wants to
+1
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject (provide
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/5/25, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
We also agreed to put only internationalized messages and
to have a single catalog by module.
Yep, that's a good task for somebody who is looking for a simple way to
contribute to Harmony's classlibs.
great, thanks Boris.
Tim
Boris Kuznetsov wrote:
Dear all,
I would like to announce one more contribution to Harmony on behalf of
Intel. The archive with the contribution is uploaded to the following
location:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-536
This contribution contains
Hi,
Just like to pay your attention on JUnit best practices concerning
this topic (in case if you are talking about UNIT tests):
http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/faq/faq.htm#best_2
Especially paragraphs two and three.
2006/5/31, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Daniel,
I think what we
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/5/30, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
It seems that instead of those million test cases we need just a few
that would verify that getXXX() methods return what was passed into
constructor
plus possibly some tests that pass
Chris Gray wrote:
It's probably also not a good idea to rely too much on JIT optimisations,
given that Harmony should run on a number of VMs and not all of these will
have a fully optimising JIT in all circumstances. It should be possible to
compile the class libraries with or without
Not sure if it's particularly relevant, but the piece on Eclipse
performance bloopers is a good read:
http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/development/performance/bloopers.html
Specifically, it mentions items to do with using string keys, the
dangers of using substring() and why they created their
Alex Blewitt wrote:
They removed the debugging statements, and it ran so fast that they
discovered all kinds of race conditions that they hadn't designed for.
So they had to put the debugging statements back in to slow it down
before shipping it to the customer :-) Mind you, I expect that
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/5/31, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Are there really 5000+ tests against *one* CTOR?
[SNIP]
I did not review all
the 5000+
tests manually.
I'm actually very happy to hear that.
geir
Alexei Zakharov skrev den 31-05-2006 11:50:
Hi,
Just like to pay your attention on JUnit best practices concerning
this topic (in case if you are talking about UNIT tests):
http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/faq/faq.htm#best_2
Especially paragraphs two and three.
If I understand this correctly
+1
On 5/30/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[
Looking through the mail thread:
[classlib] JAPI data to drive packages to completion
and following the link I found that looks like JAPI somehow supports part of
1.5 features (at least generics). It would be interesting to know for sure
which of 1.5 features JAPI supports and which not, to
+1
Etienne
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject
On 5/31/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DRLVM contains a simple JIT called Jitrino.JET in addition to a highly
optimizing JIT. The simple JIT seems to be a better choice for
starting the write barrier work.
Looking at Jitrino.JET sources, it looks like the best place to add
write
Yep, we discussed that a while ago.
IIRC there was some debate about how the message keys should look.
Today we have short strings (e.g. K1234) and there was a proposal to
make that module.id (e.g. beans.42). I recall some objections to
that proposal but cannot recreate them right now.
We
On the 0x17A day of Apache Harmony Alex Blewitt wrote:
Moral 1: saying 'It's OK, debug logging can be turned off and
log.debug(msg) is inexpensive' is a lie. If you really feel the need
for sprinkling debug statements everywhere (and I'm with others in
using a good IDE to track down problems)
2006/5/31, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No, this method is used to store operand stack item to local variable. If
you're interested in writing to fields then Compiler::gen_field_op is the
right place. We can generate a call to VM or GC helper in this method. To
create a call to any VM
+1
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject (provide
Etienne,
Some words about your example.
OPEN doesn't rely on any particular object layout, but tries to define
functional interface for object access purposes.
Open_Managed_Object_Handle is used to access this functionality from
the components other than VM Core.
In order to eliminate
+1
-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 9:06 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Acceptance of HARMONY-438 : DRL Virtual Machine
Contribution
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I
Does this have any affect on the Eclipse Plug-in for Harmony VM type? Do we
just point at 'deploy/jdk' instead of 'deploy' now?
-Nathan
-Original Message-
From: Oliver Deakin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:48 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Hi Nathan,
Good catch - you will need to point your Installed JREs dialog at the
deploy/jdk/jre directory instead of deploy/jre. No changes to the
plug-in itself should be needed however.
Thanks for spotting that!
Regards,
Oliver
Nathan Beyer wrote:
Does this have any affect on the Eclipse
On 5/31/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/5/31, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No, this method is used to store operand stack item to local
variable. If
you're interested in writing to fields then Compiler::gen_field_op is
the
right place. We can generate a call to VM or GC
Hi all,
How about using Velocity as Preprocessor.
You could put all logging Statements between an
//#if ($debug)
and
//#end
So the Code would stay pure java, and the debug Version could be compiled
without a Preprocessor.
Regards,
Soeren
Anton Luht schrieb:
It is possible to remove all calls
On 5/30/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 00:46 Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
Any good behaving optimizing runtime would inline empty methods into
nothing and therefore no performance impact would be made.
Excelent! This is much better and simplier.
public
On 5/31/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/31/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/5/31, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No, this method is used to store operand stack item to local
variable. If
you're interested in writing to fields then Compiler::gen_field_op
2006/6/1, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
How will it affect VM or GC ? The WBs will also require support from
both VM
and GC. Do you have ideas on VM/GC interface for this?
Also what will be usage and testing scenarios in the nearest future?
The VMGC interfaces is already exists in
Tim Ellison wrote:
great, thanks Boris.
+1! that's awesome!
Tim
Boris Kuznetsov wrote:
Dear all,
I would like to announce one more contribution to Harmony on behalf of
Intel. The archive with the contribution is uploaded to the following
location:
For anyone interested, I finally figured out the answer to this puzzle.
The following code compiles without error or warning using the new foreach
loop.
for (Map.Entry? extends K, ? extends V entry : map.entrySet()) {
entry.toString();
}
The way to make this work without a compile error
+1
[Original Message]
From: Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: 5/30/06 10:10:22 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Acceptance of HARMONY-438 : DRL Virtual Machine
Contribution
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the
+1
-Stepan.
On 5/31/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-438, so I can assert
that the critical provenance paperwork is in order and in SVN.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ]
That's great news...
And given the increase of activity around jchevm, can we remember to
prefix the subject line with [jchevm]... (I don't recall who started
this thread... doesn't matter... just a reminder)
Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
Archie, I have made some progress with classlib adapter. Now
Anton Luht wrote:
It is possible to remove all calls to logging below a certain level
from .class files using BCEL:
http://surguy.net/articles/removing-log-messages.xml . In this example
logging is removed on fly when class is loaded, but this tool can be
run against class files in the process
On 5/31/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/6/1, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It may be worth considering if we want JET to just call the barrier
functionality( with from/to/and slot locations )and the barrier helper
actually do everything ... including generating the
Archie Cobbs wrote:
Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
This code checks access control in eclipse. The caller of the method
should be member function of class EditorsUI. As jchevm also reports
exception creation stack frames the access check doesn't work. I can
make a workaround in classlibadapter, but I
40 matches
Mail list logo
