On 12/10/05, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Can anyone comment on what [jci] would be useful for? > >> > >> Sorry for the delay ...was on the plane to San Diego :) > >> > >> JCI - Java Compiler Interface aims to provide a common > >> API to for all compilers that generate java classes. So > >> far it supports > > > > Does the new Mustang compiler API replace JCI in concept, or is there > > something more detailed about JCI? > > "replace" is a harsh word :) > > TBH I wasn't aware that someone resurrected that JSR. > > I tried to contact the (former?) spec lead before I > came up with JCI because I needed a solution *now* > ...and could not wait for the JCP. AFAIU it was more > or less dead for a while. > > Now looking at it ...there is an overlap for sure > but it just seems to provide a subset of what JCI > provides. > > I would say JCI replaces the JSR request > from 2002 in concept ;) > > But maybe someone else should have a look at the > APIs and give a statement ...I figure I am a bit > biased :)
I won't claim to have a clue, but one idea might be to talk to Harmony about their someday implementation of the JSR. Is there a value for JCI adapting to be an implementation of the JSR, or would it be like asking for an implementation of JDBC - Useless without a context. Is this effectively the commons-logging equivalent for this JSR? Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
