harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Zhang" <zhanghuang...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] compatibility nuances
Date Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:28:33 GMT
On 7/13/06, Magnusson, Geir <geir.magnusson@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alexei Zakharov [mailto:alexei.zakharov@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 10:19 AM
> > To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org; geir@pobox.com
> > Subject: Re: [classlib] compatibility nuances
> >
> > >  That our "not in any particular
> > > order" is different than the "not in any particular order"
> > that the RI
> > > does?  I'm not trying to make light of it, but it sounds like all is
> > > correct.
> >
> > Right, from the spec point of view everything is correct.  But I'd
> > like to say that our particular order differs from RI particular order
> > (and such behavior conforms to spec). My next statement is: there are
> > stupid apps that rely on the particular order
> > returned by RI (regardless of spec). I know one already. The question
> > is: should we care or not?
> >
>
> Can you figure out what their order is?  If so, I'd use that since we
> are free to do what we want, and if someone does depende on this, it's
> one less change, and it's spec compliant.


+1.  Do our best to comply with spec and follow RI :)

Geir
>
>
> >
> > 2006/7/13, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com>:
> > > I assume you mean [drlvm], since java.lang.Class in
> > [classlib] is just a
> > > stub, right?
> > >
> > > Anyway, what would you say exactly?  That our "not in any particular
> > > order" is different than the "not in any particular order"
> > that the RI
> > > does?  I'm not trying to make light of it, but it sounds like all is
> > > correct.
> > >
> > > geir
> > >
> > > Alexei Zakharov wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have discovered we have small incompatibility in our
> > java.lang.Class
> > > > implementation. The order of elements returned by
> > > > Class.getDeclaredMethods() differs from RI. The spec says
> > here: "The
> > > > elements in the array returned are not sorted and are not in any
> > > > particular order." But I already know one application
> > that relies on
> > > > this - this was one of java.beans test (already patched).
> > I don't want
> > > > to say this is somehow bad but still like to inform the community
> > > > about this issue. Probably we need to rise non-bug
> > differences JIRA?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alexei Zakharov,
> > Intel Middleware Product 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
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>


-- 
Andrew Zhang
China Software Development Lab, IBM

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