Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gshimansky@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.198.187 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=ZMus/ckYMwhOiT5lIArcG/i3qbqTEuVB7jFbsJOdB2Hq/JxwZR6J4yHjSF8QtLUS3/SZHg6Ocjznc5T/uG+ODmV1wHibvGO/yaYDXtH2IQHoYotq+R7OL5WeZkF4QCv9u9AmQBqiBrt4nwCZWQkyEQRV4x5QZG1bMik7+ku1pek=
Message-ID: <46DFEC63.7020709@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:02:43 +0400
From: Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] DRLVM should accept Java6 classes now
References: <46DD72E3.9060108@gmail.com>
	 <6e47b64f0709042159r39240301m220ac43c992599be@mail.gmail.com>
	 <46DE8E11.3060909@gmail.com>
 <fb98610c0709060222k7ed88e71p93bdd5d459c5493c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <fb98610c0709060222k7ed88e71p93bdd5d459c5493c@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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