harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Java
Date Sun, 15 May 2005 15:11:49 GMT

On May 11, 2005, at 12:47 PM, FaeLLe wrote:

> But im still curious do you think TCK checks if Harmony would have
> implementations of the deprecated methods or can we just spraingly and
> judging the needs implement a selected few of those.

I don't want to "just squeak by" the TCK.  We should build for what  
the user community will expect, not what we can get away with.

geir

>
> On 5/11/05, Dalibor Topic <robilad@kaffe.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Dmitry Serebrennikov wrote:
>>
>>
>>> So I guess those libraries being in Java is not a foregone  
>>> conclusion
>>> either then? :) JNI is a mess though...
>>>
>>
>> The J2SE libraries require certain bits and pieces that would be  
>> pretty
>> pointless to reimplement in Java unless the target environment  
>> does not
>> provide them, and in that case you *might* be better off just  
>> porting a
>> different library from an environment to support it, rather than
>> rewriting the whole TCP/IP stack in Java, for example. That  
>> depends on
>> the environment you're targeting.
>>
>> Ideally, you want to have both options, of course. But in  
>> practice, most
>> people prefer to delegate at least some functionality to their target
>> environment, if any possible, by (re)using the facilities provided by
>> the OS or portability layers.
>>
>> To give you an example: Kaffe has an InetAddress implementation  
>> that can
>> use both the native os facilities, or delegate to the DNSJava  
>> libraries.
>> Which choice is better depends on the target environment.
>>
>> cheers,
>> dalibor topic
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> www.FaeLLe.com <http://www.FaeLLe.com>
>

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



Mime
View raw message