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: [arch] VM/Classlibrary interface
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2005 02:26:53 GMT

On Jun 3, 2005, at 1:06 PM, Sven de Marothy wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>>
>>
>>> And you can circumvent the language protection (package private...)
>>> if you work hard enough too, I believe...
>>>
>>> Keeping out of "java.lang" seems wise if we can arrange it...
>>>
>
>
>> By writing _only_ java.lang and java.lang.*,
>> we can truly speak of a separate implementation.
>> Adding only _parts_ of libraries like GNU ClassPath
>> would mean that users would implement Harmony library
>> policies, not Sun's, FSF's, or anybody elses.
>>
>
> Blatant Not-Invented-Hereism. This isn't about "Control over the
> implementation", this was about language protection features.

I won't comment on NIH (as I didn't quite grok what Dan was saying -  
I'm at 37k feet coming back on a redeye...) but we need to figure out  
if the language protection features are enough of a benefit to  
outweigh he risks of extending java.lang, and if the needs of 1.5  
require so much more that the language protection is moot.

>
> The FSF doesn't have any "library policy". What are you talking about?
>
>
>> By writing _only_ java.lang and java.lang.*,
>> we can truly speak of a separate implementation.
>>
>
> Why do you need a seperate implementation?

Separate from GNU Classpath or something else?

geir

>
> /Sven
>
>

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



Mime
View raw message