harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrey Chernyshev <a.y.chernys...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code contribution to harmony
Date Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:11:53 GMT
On 11/15/05, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the end we decided to go with a 'conventional' native code tool set
> for the native source, and 'conventional' Java code tools for the Java
> source.  People just felt more comfortable with that.
> Do you think we are missing out on something ;-) ?

Well, I can see a few potential issues with such "mixed" approach:
- In order to contribute, people would have to learn both building
technologies - Ant and make, someone may give up.
- Having make in addition to ant will introduce additional
dependencies for the build. While make is available on Unix systems,
it is not available on Windows by default, one would have to install
it as a part of cygwin, MSVC or whatever. Another issue is that nmake
that comes with MSVC and gmake are not compatible with each other.
- Overall, ant possibly better suites the portability needs, at least
between Windows and Linux

As an example, I can suggest to look at Intel's contribution of the
security package at http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-16.

Though the experts may say the example isn't ideal (the native part of
security is really simple such that the build doesn't even utilize ant
cpptask), it still may serve as illustration of the alternative
approach, e.g. building a product using a single language.

Thank you,
Andrey Chernyshev
Intel Managed Runtime Division

View raw message