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: [classlib] Preprocessor
Date Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:44:53 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
>>> Yes, the main reason I love Java is a power of tools! If you force me to
>>> work in notepad instead of IDEA with the only reason that we need a
>>> preprocessor I will have a doubt if the solution is reasonable.
>>
>> Agreed. And that is a reason why it makes sense to have the original
>> source code compilable (as Etienne raised) -- so basic Java tooling can
>> still work on the original code even when there are no pre-processor
>> helpers around (though of course that would be more painful for the
>> developer).
>>
> 
> But I'm confused here - I thought we talked about
> 
>    code w/ preprocessor statements -> processed code -> jar
> 
> as three separate steps, so the code would be able to work with basic
> java tooling if you assembled a src.jar from the processed code.

Right, but you (Mr Harmony developer) don't modify the 'processed code',
you work in the 'code w/ preprocessor statements', so you probably want
the code you are modifying to be real, compilable Java code too.

It doesn't have to be that way of course.  If you were really nuts you
could invent your own crazy language that was pre-processed into Java
source (any analogy with early C++ preprocessors and ANSI C is purely
coincidental<g>).

However, assuming you want the code you modify to be basically Java, you
might as well make it real Java.  It then makes sense for it to be valid
as Big Java (SE), and existing editors can be used on it without the
preprocessor as a poor-man's Harmony IDE.

Regards,
Tim

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)


Mime
View raw message