[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Eclipse

From: Stuart Ballard
Subject: Re: Eclipse
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:25:59 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040926)

Tom Tromey wrote:
According to japi we aren't really missing much API at all.  I suspect
some of the "errors" listed on the comparison page are actually things
that changed in later JDK releases (it would be cool if japi knew how
to do a 3 way comparison so we could filter these out).

Actually thanks to Michael Koch I know exactly how to implement that - I just haven't found the time to integrate it yet. His initial patch was a 3-liner which provided the key insight into how to make it work, but there are some subtleties that need to be taken into consideration that I didn't think of to start with.

For example, against JDK1.0 the entire java.awt.peer package is listed as missing; that should naturally be skipped based on this filter, but then what do you show as the percentage for that package? 100% missing but no errors, 100% good even though "good" simply means one big error that was skipped, or (ideally) "100% skipped", where skipped is a new category that doesn't count against us *or* for us in the statistics.

Savannah has accepted the japitools project, btw, and I'm waiting for them to import my CVS history now. Then anyone who wants to help hacking on this can get access to the repository, and we can make a japitools mailing list etc.

I'm hoping that having the project open to other developers will allow me to delegate a few of the simpler tasks that need to be done. And maybe the more complicated tasks, too - I'm unlikely to be able to make any attempt to interpret the 1.5 bytecode features or incorporate them into japi files in the forseeable future, but I'd love if someone else could work on this. Any volunteers? :)


Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer
NetReach, Inc.
(215) 283-2300, ext. 126

reply via email to

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