On the 0x349 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote: > Yuri Dolgov wrote: > >> Looking at the Sun's list of enhancements for Java6 [1] I found non > >> features specific to VM except for a small change in reflection API [2]. > >> So it seems to me that VM in Java5 and Java6 can be the same. > > Yes, that's fine. But why don't we just put this in Java 6 branch? I > > understand > > that our VM works fine with Java 6 classes, but what about classlib and JIT? > > I think that throwing UnsupportedClassVersionError is just a tool > > which > > help to avoid unpredictable results. > > Well, because there isn't a Java6 branch for VM. And I don't think > that a change in 1 line deserves to create one.
+1 alternatively: if it is one liner, we can make make it an option in the build. > > On 9/6/07, Gregory Shimansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yuri Dolgov wrote: > >>> 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? > >> Looking at the Sun's list of enhancements for Java6 [1] I found non > >> features specific to VM except for a small change in reflection API [2]. > >> So it seems to me that VM in Java5 and Java6 can be the same. > >> > >> [1] http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/features.html > >> [2] > >> > >> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/enhancements.html > >> > >>> 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 > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> -- > >> Gregory > >> > >> > > > > > -- > Gregory > > -- Egor Pasko
