harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathan Beyer" <nbe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][luni] Compatibility :: EnumSet.elementType field doesn't exist
Date Tue, 27 Nov 2007 03:53:02 GMT
I agree with Tim. I don't think would should give much, if any,
precedence to such efforts. Yes, it's trivial, but this slope is
slippery.

-Nathan

On Nov 26, 2007 4:25 PM, Zakharov, Vasily M <vasily.m.zakharov@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Tim, I see your point.
>
> I just wonder that if we have a potential problem (that already created
> an issue, and could potentially create more), and the thing is easy to
> fix - then, though we're not guilty, why don't we fix it?
>
> Vasily
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Ellison [mailto:t.p.ellison@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 12:58 AM
> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [classlib][luni] Compatibility :: EnumSet.elementType field
> doesn't exist
>
> Zakharov, Vasily M wrote:
> > I'm trying to run Geronimo Unit Tests 2.0.2 on Harmony, and I've found
> > that GUT uses XStream 1.1.3, which addresses
> > java.util.EnumSet.elementType field that is package private in RI and
> is
> > absent in Harmony.
>
> Yep, it is non-api so just happens to be different in Harmony.
>
> > Of course, this is a problem in XStream, and moreover it's already
> fixed
> > there in v1.2.2 (see [1]), however, I think this is a point where we
> > could be compatible with RI just in case some other application does
> the
> > same mistake.
>
> We are never going to address all the internal implementation
> differences, so it is a question as to whether this is 'important
> enough' to change the Harmony implementation.
>
> > Harmony implementation of EnumSet has elementClass field that seems to
> > be the equivalent of RI's elementType field. So my suggestion is to
> > rename elementClass to elementType and thus become more compatible and
> > move GUT v2.0 enabling forward.
> >
> > I've filed HARMONY-5196 for this problem and attached a simple
> renaming
> > patch that I suggest to apply.
> >
> > Are there any objections?
> >
> > If not, than could someone please commit the patch?
>
> In this case, I see you have ascertained that XStream have fixed their
> invalid reference, and Geronimo has moved up to the fixed version [1],
> so I think we should not apply this renaming.  I suspect there will be
> more cases like this, and we'll have to deal with them one at a time --
> but while other projects are being accommodating and making the 'right'
> fix then i think we should go that route.
>
> [1]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/200711.mbox/%3c474
> B35C0.5090402@earthlink.net%3e
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Closed Joint Stock Company Intel A/O
> Registered legal address: 125252, Moscow, Russian Federation,
> Chapayevsky Per, 14.
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>

Mime
View raw message