[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Eclipse 3.0

From: Andrew John Hughes
Subject: Re: Eclipse 3.0
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 12:30:10 +0100

On Fri, 2004-07-02 at 12:20, Michael Koch wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Am Freitag, 2. Juli 2004 13:00 schrieb Roman Kennke:
> > for the 0.10 release we could and should throw out any such methods
> > if it ain't break anything, and those, which would break
> > compilation should either be implemented (best solution) or should
> > throw a
> > NotImplementedException, which tells exactly, WHAT and WHERE
> > something is not implemented (and maybe WHY ;).
> >
> > Do you think, that makes sense? Or is this too much effort? Could
> > finding such methods be automated?
> I think this is a very bad idea. First its too late for such a big 
> change and second this would irritate users why their apps dont even 
> compile against GNU classpath anymore. Better add FIXMEs over all and 
> track them with tools like grep or Eclipse and implement them as time 
> and interest comes.
> Michael
> - -- 
> Homepage:
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> iD8DBQFA5UT0WSOgCCdjSDsRAkTzAJ4pDrmFXVp0Hp2mIBhCJqOHq92opwCfXshq
> ttNKQLhIRJMdfT31sezGOJA=
> =O9rW
> _______________________________________________
> Classpath mailing list
> address@hidden
Throwing an Error or similar in all cases would solve this problem in a
proactive way and still allow compilation.  I think people would be more
annoyed to find that an error they thought they had is due to nulls from
Andrew :-)
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history.
`Don't bother us with politics' respond those who don't want to learn.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]