harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yuri Dolgov" <dolgov.g.y...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] DRLVM should accept Java6 classes now
Date Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:01:40 GMT
> we can make this constant definable by the build.
That's a great idea. I agree.

Thanks,
Yuri


On 9/6/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Egor Pasko wrote:
> > On the 0x349 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> >> Yuri Dolgov wrote:
> >>>> Looking at the Sun's list of enhancements for Java6 [1] I found non
> >>>> features specific to VM except for a small change in reflection API
> [2].
> >>>> So it seems to me that VM in Java5 and Java6 can be the same.
> >>> Yes, that's fine. But why don't we just put this in Java 6 branch? I
> >>> understand
> >>> that our VM works fine with Java 6 classes, but what about classlib
> and JIT?
> >>> I think that throwing UnsupportedClassVersionError is just a tool
> >>> which
> >>> help to avoid unpredictable results.
> >> Well, because there isn't a Java6 branch for VM. And I don't think
> >> that a change in 1 line deserves to create one.
> >
> > +1
> > alternatively: if it is one liner, we can make make it an option in the
> build.
>
> After the patch that I've committed at 572698 the class version is
> controlled by a single constant CLASSFILE_MAJOR_MAX in Class.h. Yes I
> think we can make this constant definable by the build.
>
> >>> On 9/6/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Yuri Dolgov wrote:
> >>>>> Hello Gregory,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm not sure what is the reason to support classes with version
50
> if
> >>>> don't
> >>>>> support
> >>>>> Java 6 features? Maybe it worth to make this changes in separate
> Java 6
> >>>>> branch to
> >>>>> prevent confisions?
> >>>> Looking at the Sun's list of enhancements for Java6 [1] I found non
> >>>> features specific to VM except for a small change in reflection API
> [2].
> >>>> So it seems to me that VM in Java5 and Java6 can be the same.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/features.html
> >>>> [2]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/enhancements.html
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 9/5/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 9/4/07, Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hello
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> As of revision 572698 DRLVM should not throw
> UnsupportedClassVersion
> >>>>>>>> when it sees a class file compiled with Java6 compiler
(or with
> >>>> -target
> >>>>>>>> 1.6 by ECJ 3.3). These class files should work with
no problems
> with
> >>>>>> DRLVM.
> >>>>>>> Sould we create a java6 branch for DRL VM (as we did for
classlib)
> and
> >>>>>>> move your update to the branch?
> >>>>>> I don't think this deserves a real branch. The fact that VM
accepts
> >>>>>> classes of version 50 doesn't mean it is Java6 compliant. It
also
> >>>>>> doesn't make it non-Java5 VM in any way.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On the other hand, if we make changes like in [1] it may break
> >>>>>> compatibility with older Java5 code, and in such case we'll
maybe
> want
> >>>>>> to create a separate branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/enhancements.html
> >>>>>>>> For testing I used classlib (trunk) compiled with ECJ
3.3 with
> >>>> -source
> >>>>>>>> 1.6 -target 1.6 and all VM acceptance tests compiled
with Sun's
> javac
> >>>>>>>> from JDK 6.0.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Gregory
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Gregory
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Gregory
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gregory
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Gregory
>
>

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