Paul Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "John Keiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Paul, I know you were opposed to this sort of thing earlier, but in
> > the case of 1.1 vs. 1.2 compilation, as well as this sanity check
> > thing, there is a lot of good that would be done.
>
> I still don't believe that we need to ship a 1.1-to-the-exact-spec
> version. I don't see anyone getting upset with a hybrid 1.1/1.2
> version, which is fully compatible with 1.1.
>
> In the case of sanity checks, and possibly "other" cases which I've
> run into (I'd like String.intern() to be compiled as either native or
> non-native), I do feel that some type of simple/extremely-primitive
> pre-processor might come in handy. Writing something in perl should
> be enough. (or we could always use ANTLR (www.antlr.org) for a Java
> pre-processor.) Maybe, John, you'd like to write up a spec and get
> everyone's opinion? _Simple_ #ifdef and #include primitives should be
> plenty.
Ideally, if it is necessary, we would have some sort of option to
configure such as "--with-jvm=1.1" or "--with-jvm=1.2". At least IMO.
Brian
--
|-------------------------------|Software Engineer
|Brian Jones |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |http://www.nortel.net
|http://www.classpath.org/ |------------------------------
