Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 217.158.94.220 is neither permitted nor
 denied by domain of t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
Message-ID: <4379DFCF.9070001@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:17:03 +0000
From: Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Code contribution to harmony
References: <6928c5160511150432o11a75538sc0693f395b284da2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6928c5160511150432o11a75538sc0693f395b284da2@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> First of all, good job with this class libraries contribution!

Thanks Andrey (on behalf of a wide group of people who worked hard to
make it happen).

> Sorry for being late, but I have one question related to build. I
> noticed that make is used to build native sources. Did you try using
> ant cpptask? If yes, what kind of issues did you face that influenced
> the choice in favor of make?

Yes, we had a brief encounter with the cpptask and we were using it for
a while in our regular builds.  The cpptask appears to be very powerful
and I probably didn't do it any justice by having a quite large unwieldy
script to cover a number of platforms.

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 ;-) ?

Regards,
Tim

> Andrey Chernyshev
> Intel Managed Runtime Division
> 
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.