harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dalibor Topic <robi...@kaffe.org>
Subject Re: [arch] VM/Classlibrary interface
Date Sat, 28 May 2005 13:40:32 GMT
Tor-Einar Jarnbjo wrote:
> Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:
>> Last time I checked, no one, nether me or you, is developing code 
>> agains the TCK, but to a real JVM. And as hard as we may try, 
>> sometimes we end with software that depends on unspecified behavior. 
>> So it's better try to be "bug compatible" too.
> No, I don't agree on this either. Dalibor already mentioned several good 
> reasons why Harmony should not try to be implementation compatible with 
> any other VM and another good reason is that the usage of 
> com.sun-classes is also version or release dependent of Sun's VM.

Well, it needs to be compatible and pass the official test suites. 
That's possible and will happen. Being "compatible" with something for 
which no specification or documentation exists is impossible, though, so 
it can't happen.

And in practice, it is not necessary, either. Evolution sorts out 
portable from unportable code over time. I have not seen an actively 
maintained application using the "com.sun.java.swing" or 
"java.awt.swing" migrational, runtime-specific API[1] in the last 3 
years at least. ;)

dalibor topic

[1] http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/package.html

View raw message