db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Javadoc lies
Date Mon, 01 May 2006 17:45:24 GMT
Hi Andrew,

Thanks to your excellent work on derby-1078, it appears that we use the 
1.6 javac when compiling in a shell window whose JAVA_HOME points at a 
1.6 installation. Thanks to your changes, the build targets tell the 1.6 
compiler to regard pre-JDBC4 source as down-rev and to generate byte 
code that will run on jdk1.3.

I ran the experiment you recommended: I compiled and then generated 
javadoc all in a shell window whose JAVA_HOME pointed at jdk1.6. This 
did not change the javadoc result. E.g., the javadoc still falsely 
asserted that our JDBC3 DataSources implemented the JDBC4 Wrapper interface.

The result was not affected when I generated javadoc with the following 
ant switch (also in a 1.6 shell window):

             source="1.4"

Regards,
-Rick

Andrew McIntyre wrote:

> On 4/28/06, acemccloudxx@comcast.net <acemccloudxx@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, I don't know that the Mac fans on this list would be very 
>> interested in having everything built with the 1.6 JDK.
>
>
> To clarify, the recent changes that went in with DERBY-1078 mean that
> you can build with 1.4, 1.5, or 1.6, and the resulting build will run
> on 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6.
>
> Rick, I think David's suggestion #2 may be the answer. Now that
> DERBY-1078 is fixed, you can build everything with the 1.6 compiler.
> What does 1.6 javadoc say if you compiled everything with the 1.6
> compiler?
>
> andrew



Mime
View raw message