sebb wrote: > On 24/03/2009, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> That sentence is a direct copy from an email when this was discussed a >> while back [1], though I agree it could sound better. How about >> changing "is not a compatible implementation" to "can not claim to be >> a compatible implementation", so: >> >> "Apache BSF 3 is an implementation of JSR-223, the Scripting for the >> Java Platform APIs. Note that this software hasn't been tested with >> the JSR 223 TCK, and therefore can not claim to be a compatible >> implementation of JSR-223." >> > > Seems good to me, though I think it could go further. > +1
> Is it a complete implementation, i.e. are all aspects of the API implemented? > AFAIK: yes. > Are there tests for all aspects of the API, including edge-cases? > Not sure. > If the TCK were used, are the developers confident would it pass? > AFAIK: yes. (Sanka, Nanka could you comment?) ---rony
