harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Supporting working on a single module?
Date Tue, 09 May 2006 20:49:44 GMT
Chris Gray wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 May 2006 22:03, Etienne Gagnon wrote:
>> Yes.  But only by checking out everything.
>> I am developing a API "stubs" project, which is a full "stubs"
>> implementation of the Java 1.5 API.  My objective was actually to allow
>> for not needing an API "implementation" to compile code against the API.
>>  I was planning to use this, among other uses, for compiling SableVM's
>> luni-kernel implementation.
> For what my opinion is worth (on a good day, a cup of coffee, but not at Caffè 
> Florian), this would be an excellent thing to have. It will never be easy to 
> work on the core Java APIs in a totally modular way (because Sun didn't 
> design things that way), but with such a set of stubs one could at least work 
> on a group of classes in isolation and be able to compile them to bytecode. 
> Furthermore the stubs can readily be used for white-box testing during 
> development, by simply adding println()s. Go for it!

I disagree -- we spent a good period of time last summer carving up the
class library into modules defined by Java and internal APIs.  I believe
it would be detrimental to disregard these boundaries by compiling
against the entire Java APIs, as that would perpetuate the 'spaghetti
code syndrome'.

We could use compile-against stubs, but would also need them for the
org.apache.* packages that comprise our internal APIs, for now I see no
problem with using the actual JARs that we produce.



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

Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org

View raw message