Tim, all,
I was offline for 2 weeks, now catching up with Harmony pace... I've
seen more specific thread started, [drlvm] Doing the minimum to
support Java 5 classfiles,
so just a quick affirmative to round off this thread:
Yes, I'm going to patch this in the nearest time.
2006/6/16, Tim
Tim Ellison wrote:
Alexey Varlamov wrote:
So we need answers from DRLVM and jchevm guys...
Archie has expressed the jchevm opinion in favour of the change --
anyone familiar with DRLVM care to comment?
(Of course this would be after Geir's VM build work, just asking)
Regards,
Tim
DRLVM
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Seems everyone is glad to move to 1.5, so I'd like to know when will
Harmony reach this milestone? I can hardly wait :)
Good to see your enthusiasm! I was going to get an IBM VME download in
place first so that those who choose can continue to use that VM without
I'd like to suggest that we get at least one of the project VMs to
support this before we switch.
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Seems everyone is glad to move to 1.5, so I'd like to know when will
Harmony reach this milestone? I can hardly wait :)
Good to see your
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'd like to suggest that we get at least one of the project VMs to
support this before we switch.
Yep, Alexey said that there were some (minor) changes required to
DRLVM, and Archie said that JCHEVM should already handle the new
classfile format. Hopefully we will all
On 16 June 2006 at 12:11, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'd like to suggest that we get at least one of the project VMs to
support this before we switch.
Yep, Alexey said that there were some (minor) changes required to
DRLVM, and Archie said that JCHEVM
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 16 June 2006 at 12:11, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'd like to suggest that we get at least one of the project VMs to
support this before we switch.
Yep, Alexey said that there were some (minor) changes required to
DRLVM, and Archie
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/6/8, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/6/8, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
what are the benefits?
The main benefit for me is to have possibility to use all the 1.5
extensions without any problems.
We will need to make this step
So we need answers from DRLVM and jchevm guys...
Archie has expressed the jchevm opinion in favour of the change --
anyone familiar with DRLVM care to comment?
(Of course this would be after Geir's VM build work, just asking)
Regards,
Tim
DRLVM needs some (minor) changes to support
Tim Ellison wrote:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/6/8, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/6/8, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
what are the benefits?
The main benefit for me is to have possibility to use all the 1.5
extensions without any problems.
We will need to
Alexey Varlamov wrote:
So we need answers from DRLVM and jchevm guys...
Archie has expressed the jchevm opinion in favour of the change --
anyone familiar with DRLVM care to comment?
(Of course this would be after Geir's VM build work, just asking)
Regards,
Tim
DRLVM needs some
Tim Ellison wrote:
Thanks to many stellar contributions all round we are pretty much
exhausting the work we can do with the temporary solution we adopted of
source=1.5 target=jsr14|1.4 compiler flags.
How do you feel about moving to 1.5 for real? It would be simple to
change the Java compiler
what are the benefits?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/6/8, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Thanks to many stellar contributions all round we are pretty much
exhausting the work we can do with the temporary solution we adopted of
source=1.5 target=jsr14|1.4 compiler flags.
How do you feel about moving to
2006/6/8, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
what are the benefits?
The main benefit for me is to have possibility to use all the 1.5
extensions without any problems.
We will need to make this step somewhen anyway since we are going to
create 1.5 implementation.
The only question from me for
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'm +1 except I'd like to see us get to the point where we can
- produce a full snapshot of classlib + VM (using DRLVM or JCHEVM or
whatever)
Absolutely, so how close are we to doing that?
- understand the timing of getting said VMs far enough that code will
Great news!
I can't wait to work on REAL 1.5 !
On 6/8/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks to many stellar contributions all round we are pretty much
exhausting the work we can do with the temporary solution we adopted of
source=1.5 target=jsr14|1.4 compiler flags.
How do you feel
psst don't tell anyone, but there is a workaround for new Eclipse builds
too. If you set the compiler options to be project specific, then edit
the core settings file manually to be source 1.5 and target 1.4, it does
the 'right thing' for us ;-) But don't tell the Eclipse-folk they'll
only fix
2006/6/8, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/6/8, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
what are the benefits?
The main benefit for me is to have possibility to use all the 1.5
extensions without any problems.
We will need to make this step somewhen anyway since we are
On 8 June 2006 at 7:01, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm +1 except I'd like to see us get to the point where we can
- produce a full snapshot of classlib + VM (using DRLVM or JCHEVM or
whatever)
I agree. I'd quite like to see a snapshot with a free vm and as much
of the
On 8 June 2006 at 16:54, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what are the benefits?
For one, being able to use compilers in a supported mode, that wont
break if we revert the trivial change in HARMONY-344. ;-)
-Mark.
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/6/8, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Thanks
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I'm +1 except I'd like to see us get to the point where we can
- produce a full snapshot of classlib + VM (using DRLVM or JCHEVM or
whatever)
Absolutely, so how close are we to doing that?
Trying to wack the drlvm build into shape...
-
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 8 June 2006 at 7:01, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm +1 except I'd like to see us get to the point where we can
- produce a full snapshot of classlib + VM (using DRLVM or JCHEVM or
whatever)
I agree. I'd quite like to see a snapshot with a free vm
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
The only question from me for now: does all the Harmony VMs (DRLVM,
j9, jchevm) support 1.5 version of class files?
JCHEVM should handle the new CONSTANT_Class and classfile version, but
other stuff like 1.5 reflection won't work yet. So far little attention
and testing
Mark,
I understand your concerns about static linking of the large number of
the libraries... We thought about this too...
But we decided that for now it is the best way: we have to manage only
few libraries inside the Harmony deploy directory... Which is changing
its contents so often :)
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
Mark,
I understand your concerns about static linking of the large number of
the libraries... We thought about this too...
But we decided that for now it is the best way: we have to manage only
few libraries inside the Harmony deploy directory... Which is changing
Mark Hindess wrote:
If it is acceptable, I'd very much like to create some snapshots in the
form of debian and rpm packages to see if we can encourage the masses
to give Harmony a try.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
How does it work in real life? Are there linux packaging 'czars' that
we
On 8 June 2006 at 11:54, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
Mark,
I understand your concerns about static linking of the large number
of the libraries... We thought about this too...
But we decided that for now it is the best way: we have to manage
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 8 June 2006 at 11:54, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
Mark,
I understand your concerns about static linking of the large number
of the libraries... We thought about this too...
But we decided that for now it is the best way: we
28 matches
Mail list logo
