harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Moving forward with RMI and Math ( was Re: towards a new implementation of java.math)
Date Wed, 24 May 2006 05:21:30 GMT
On 5/24/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>
> 2006/5/24, Geir Magnusson Jr :
> > I'd like to propose that we choose what we judge to be the best RMI
> > implementation, and the best math implementation now so we can move
> > forward, with the understanding that anyone interested can continue to
> > work to merge the additional contributions into whatever was chosen.
> +1
>
> I suggest that as a base we take RMI from Intel as it seems to be
> interoperable
> with RI and take Math from ITC as it reportedly has better performance.


Hmm, I guess that 'base implementation' is implementation that locates in
modules/rmi. Right?
But I resolved HARMONY-471 5 days ago and ITC implementation is now in
modules/rmi folder. Do you suggest moving it to another folder?

Then we will aplly best ideas from counterparts implementations to the base.


I'd concentrate first on pulling out implementation-independent tests from
both contributions and creating RMI test suite that can be used to evaluate
both implementations.

Thanks,
Stepan.

Does it work for everyone?
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> >
> > We then get out of the "cross patch between HARMONY-Y and HARMONY-X"
> > stuff...
> >
> > I don't mind keeping rmi1, rmi2, rmi3, math1, math2, etc as long as we
> > have "rmi" and "math" which are understood to be the ones we're moving
> > with at this moment.  it's kinda confusing right now...
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > geir
> >
> >
> > 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.)
> > >
> > > In this JIRA, I modified the build ant files to support a property,
> > > 'hy.rmi.module', which defaults to 'rmi'.  I did this so that, if we
> > > integrate the Intel implementationas modules/rmi-intel, developers can
> > > easily build/test the different implementation just by overriding the
> > > property on the ant command line.  For example:
> > >
> > >   ant -f make/build.xml -Dhy.rmi.module=rmi-intel
> > >
> > > It would be quite trivial to do the same for the math implementations
> > > (and crypto I suppose).  If we were to do this, perhaps the process of
> > > analysis and creation of a combined implementation could be done
> within
> > > the project?  In public and with more potential contributions.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

------------------------------------------------------
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message