Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 33245 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2007 12:24:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Aug 2007 12:24:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 67099 invoked by uid 500); 3 Aug 2007 12:23:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 67069 invoked by uid 500); 3 Aug 2007 12:23:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Users List" Reply-To: "Ant Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list user@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 67058 invoked by uid 99); 3 Aug 2007 12:23:58 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:23:58 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 12:23:33 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IGwBm-0001PZ-Mc for user@ant.apache.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:23:30 -0700 Message-ID: <11982252.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT) From: billf5293 To: user@ant.apache.org Subject: Re: Problem with build after method signature change In-Reply-To: <255d8d690708021156l507e3c28y9fcb958e8cc6ba5e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: bfindeisen@hmstn.com References: <11969482.post@talk.nabble.com> <255d8d690708021156l507e3c28y9fcb958e8cc6ba5e@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thanks for the reply. The reason we are doing these incremental builds is because unfortunately we use very large applets containing a number of jars. One of the biggest complaints we have about our product is the fact that downloading all these jars after an update is time consuming. With these incremental builds only the jars that need updating are touched allowing the client to use cached jars for those jars that aren't updated. Thanks. Dominique Devienne-2 wrote: > > On 8/2/07, billf5293 wrote: >> >> We are experiencing a problem with our build after a method signature >> change >> in one of our classes. A method was changed from non-static to static. >> Since the dependant class files would still compile ant did not compile >> them. The result is a IncompatibleClassChangeError at runtime saying a >> non-static method is expected. >> >> Is there any way to check class compatibility? > > It's generally regarded as unnecessary, since Java compiles fast > enough that doing a full rebuild is much simpler and safer than trying > to do an intelligent incremental build. > > There are IDEs and also JavaMake that do such incremental builds, and > I played with JavaMake in the past, but the added complexity is not > worth it IMHO. It all depends on the project size. --DD > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Problem-with-build-after-method-signature-change-tf4207673.html#a11982252 Sent from the Ant - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org