On 24/03/2009, Rony G. Flatscher (Apache) <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > 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 >
In particular, it would be useful to mention that this implementation runs on Java 1.4+ whereas AIUI Java 1.6 is the first version which includes the API. Should probably also mention that this means that the API does not use generics (not sure how many classes this affects). > > 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 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscr...@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-h...@jakarta.apache.org
