On 25/03/2009, Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu-wien.ac.at> wrote: > Hi Sebb, > > just for the record: the final specifications of JSR-223 (probably with > more information than with the Java 6 docs) can be found here: > <http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr223/index.html>.
Thanks. > > sebb wrote: > > I think the javax.script classes are nearly ready. > > There are one or two unit tests still needed and the Javadoc needs a > > final going over. > > > > The bsf-utils component includes an HTTP component and an XML > > component. However, HTTP does not seem to be complete, and the > > ScriptEnginePool is definitely not complete or bug free. > > > > The XML component has comments regarding temporary code for beta2, and > > this is referenced in the ScriptEngineManager.initXMLHelper() method - > > should this code still be there? > > > > If so, the Release Notes should note that these classes are not complete. > > > > +1 OK, I'm currently adding details on the (few) API changes I have made. > > > > == > > > > There's almost no documentation on BSF 3.0 - the existing > > documentation is all about BSF 2, which is completely different. > > There's also no information on upgrading. > > > > I think these need fixing before a formal (non-beta) release of 3.0 can be > made. > > > > Maybe. :) > > Seriously, I think too that a section on BSF-3 needs to be added that > points out that > > * BSF-3.0 is not compatible with BSF-2.4, but an opensource > implemenation of JSR-223 a.k.a. "Java 6 scripting", > * BSF-3.0 can be deployed and used starting with Java 1.4.2 (no > dependency on Java 6), > * that there are plans to bridge both frameworks by eventually > supplying a BSF 2.4 engine that bridges all BSF 3 scripting > languages [based on ant's engine], and a BSF 3.0 engine that > bridges all BSF 2.4 scripting languages (this would allow a smooth > migration path to BSF 3.0), > * BSF-2.4 remains maintained for those who have been using it. > > Regards, > > > ---rony > > > P.S.: Asked Geir for the TCK-223. If that does not work out, I try to > get it for private use from Mike Grogan as a member of JSR-223. It might be interesting to run the JUnit tests against the Java 6 implementation. That would help show if the tests agree with the spec., but of course won't reveal any missing tests. Not sure how easy it will be to ignore the local classes - I might have to create a temporary Eclipse project and copy the code over. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscr...@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-h...@jakarta.apache.org
