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: ITC rmi tests (was Re: towards a new implementation of java.math)
Date Wed, 17 May 2006 16:30:53 GMT
Mark Hindess wrote:
> On 17 May 2006 at 12:30, "Daniel Gandara" <danielgandara@neosur.com> wrote:
>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>> Daniel,
>>>
>>> I've just contributed a JIRA,
>>>  http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-471
>>> that integrates the ITC rmi implementation as modules/rmi.  (The jsr14
>>> version.  Only the code at the moment, I creating the scripts/patches
>>> for the tests next.)
>>    We've been working on improvements to the rmi test suite,
>> I've contributed that at http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-473
>> (I created a new JIRA since previous one HARMONY-211 was closed-)
>> so please take that test suite.
> 
> Thanks for the heads-up.  I just saw the JIRA messages.  (I notice it
> includes all the code again and is classified as a contribution.  But
> I assume this is just a derivative work of the previous contribution
> rather than a new contribution?  That is we don't need to wait for
> another vote.)

I disagree -- i think the simplest thing would be for Daniel to submit
the delta rather than another version of the original contribution.

Regards,
Tim


> Integrating the tests was proving interesting.  Have you been following
> the discussion of the test naming/layout conventions?  The latest
> proposal is here:
> 
>   http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/classlibrary/testing.html
> 
> I was having a little difficulty in (quickly) figuring out which tests
> are implementation-independent (api) tests.  Or indeed which tests will
> run stand-alone without any infrastructure being configured.  Perhaps
> you could help?  I don't really like the idea of integrating code
> without at least some tests that everyone can run.
> 
> In the meantime, I'll take a look at the new JIRA.
> 
>> Daniel Gandara
>> BTW: we are a bunch of Daniels here at Cordoba :)))
> 
> ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> -Mark.
> 
>>> On 17 May 2006 at 11:19, "Daniel Fridlender" <dfridlender@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> After a discussion we had a few weeks ago in this forum on the
>>>> different implementations of java.math donated to Harmony
>>>> (Harmony-(39+380) and Harmony-199) we (ITC) decided to voluteer for
>>>> the task of integrating them into a single implementation which would
>>>> benefit from the best features of Harmony-39, 380 and 199.
>>>>
>>>> We will consider comparing on a method-by-method level but also on
>>>> ideas level so that the new implementation will probably require
>>>> re-programming good ideas from the existing implementations.  In the
>>>> case of BigInteger we will also compare the benefits of the different
>>>> internal representations.
>>>>
>>>> Right now we are analysing the two implementations.  Once we are done
>>>> with this analysis we will make it public and propose a way to proceed
>>>> towards an integration.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, we had problems patching Harmony-380 over Harmony-39, it attempts
>>>> to erase non-existing lines.  Did we miss something?  Is there any
>>>> other intermediate patch that we have missed?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Daniel Fridlender
>>>> ITC
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> 
> 

-- 

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


Mime
View raw message