> From: Paul Kinnucan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 11:21 AM
> To: Schewe, Jon (MN65)
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: PROPOSAL: New Java Build Feature
>
>
> At 10:57 AM 3/19/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >Have you thought about using jikes for dependancy checking?
> Or even just
> >taking the dependancy checking code out of it and using that
> separatly? It
> >is open source and I've found it's dependancy checking to be
> most excellent.
>
> Yes, I have and rejected it for the following reasons:
>
> 1. It does not produce JPDA compatible classes and so the
> classes that
> it produces cannot be debugged with JDEbug or (new)jdb).
I realize that and do not suggest using jikes for the actual compiling, just
grab the dependancy engine.
> 2. I have encountered other obscure compile problems with jikes that
> have destroyed any confidence that I had in the classes
> that it creates.
I'm sorry to hear that, I've found it to adhear to the Java Language Spec
better, but never seen problems.
> 3. I tried using the dependency files that it produced in a
> make file and
> I could never get them to work correctly with make. Yes,
> all the class
> files that needed to be rebuilt would be
> rebuilt--sometimes many times
> because both jikes and make were doing dependency
> checking on the same file set, totally unaware of each
> other. Further,
> the dependency files would not work for projects that
> maintain source
> and class files in separate directories, which is the
> organization that
> I favor.
Yes, I've seen this as well, however the +F flag works well, I am suggesting
we take the logic from this and encapsulate this in some library or
something useful for JDE.
> 4. Another JDE user has told me that he uses dependency files
> generated
> by jikes but that he has to massage them with a script to get them
> to work in a makefile. I don't think a user should have
> to work that
> hard to get
> an automatic build system working.
I agree.
> 5. Supposing that jikes dependency files worked, using them
> still would entail
> starting a fresh instance of javac for each class
> (remember, I don't
> trust jikes
> for compiling). With compile masters, only one
> invocation of javac is
> required
> to build an entire project. I'm inclined to believe that
> building a
> project with one invocation
> of javac would be faster than building the same project
> with multiple
> invocations
> of jikes.
I tried doing a compile master back with JDK 1.1.x and it didn't work for
me. My test cases was to just do imports of all classes, I realize that
import * won't work either and did try listing them explicitly with an empty
body and didn't get much success.
