Hello Gregory, I'm not sure what is the reason to support classes with version 50 if don't support Java 6 features? Maybe it worth to make this changes in separate Java 6 branch to prevent confisions?
Thanks, Yuri On 9/5/07, Gregory Shimansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stepan Mishura wrote: > > On 9/4/07, Gregory Shimansky wrote: > >> Hello > >> > >> As of revision 572698 DRLVM should not throw UnsupportedClassVersion > >> when it sees a class file compiled with Java6 compiler (or with -target > >> 1.6 by ECJ 3.3). These class files should work with no problems with > DRLVM. > >> > > > > Sould we create a java6 branch for DRL VM (as we did for classlib) and > > move your update to the branch? > > I don't think this deserves a real branch. The fact that VM accepts > classes of version 50 doesn't mean it is Java6 compliant. It also > doesn't make it non-Java5 VM in any way. > > On the other hand, if we make changes like in [1] it may break > compatibility with older Java5 code, and in such case we'll maybe want > to create a separate branch. > > [1] > > http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/enhancements.html > > >> For testing I used classlib (trunk) compiled with ECJ 3.3 with -source > >> 1.6 -target 1.6 and all VM acceptance tests compiled with Sun's javac > >> from JDK 6.0. > >> > >> -- > >> Gregory > >> > > > > > -- > Gregory > >
