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 thinking of OSGi bundles
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
interfaces to
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.
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 provide
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?
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
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)
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
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.
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
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-defined
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
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
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 it
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 most cases I
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
