Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Jeroen" == Jeroen Frijters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jeroen> Would anyone mind if I made the > Jeroen> java.lang.String.CaseInsensitiveComparator inner class > Jeroen> non-private (i.e. make it package accessible)? > > I'm sure it would be fine. > But why do you need this?
It's a complicated scenario and I'm not sure I'm happy with it. I'll try to explain: IKVM.NET doesn't use java.lang.String, because it uses the String class from the underlying platform (.NET). However, to build GNU Classpath (using a regular Java compiler, I use Jikes) I have to have a String class, so it makes sense to use java/lang/String.java from Classpath for this. Now, obviously, the .NET String doesn't provide all the methods that java.lang.String does, so I have a package private helper class java.lang.StringHelper that contains static methods that implement all the missing String methods. It also contains the static field CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER, and this is intialized with an instance of java.lang.String.CaseInsensitiveComparator, because it is private I cannot directly instantiate it from within my Java StringHelper class, I have to use a "native" method. It would be cleaner if I could just instantiate it from within my StringHelper code. An alternative would be to provide my own implementation of a java.lang.String$CaseInsensitiveComparator class and pretend it is an inner class of java.lang.String, but this has the downside that it complicates my build process (I have to ignore the Classpath String$CaseInsensitiveComparator.class) and I have to duplicate the (admittedly small) source code. Regards, Jeroen _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
