harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Preprocessor
Date Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:17:35 GMT
On 10/31/06, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > What are the reasons to exclude the most standard solution here:
> branching.
> > Do you think we need a lot of them?
> I don't think we are excluding any option for maintaining similar code
> streams (5.0 & 6.0, SE & ME, etc.) it's just a discussion at the moment.
> Similarly, I'm not advocating the use of aspects for maintaining
> different code streams; but rather I was saying that IDE support is
> likely going to be a requirement for any technology (apt, preprocessor,
> post-processing, aspects, ...) that we choose to solve the problem.
> I'm sure we wouldn't even want simple branching without a decent merge
> tool to keep things in sync.

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.

BTW I see from the discussion that AspectJ is considered as possible
solution. I'm not a guru in this extension of Java and AFAIK it allows only
to add method-entry/exits code. You can't add logging into the middle of the
method. You can't change the method behaviour with it. So the question is:
what an improvement we will have with AspectJ?

Mikhail Fursov

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