harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sian January" <sianjanu...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Upgrading BCEL?
Date Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:56:25 GMT
ASM might be a good candidate.  I haven't looked closely to see if it
provides everything we need, but it was apparently designed to be as small
and as fast as possible, which would be good for pack200.  It's under a BSD
license - would that be ok for us?

We would will still have to keep BCEL 5.2 while Yoko depends on it, but I
don't see why we can't use something different for pack200 and any other
Harmony uses.



On 19/07/2008, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Should we be considering replacing BCEL? It sounds like the project isn't
> going anywhere.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to raise the issue of upgrading BCEL again.  I had a
> conversation
> > with the people on the BCEL mailing list back in June[1] and it seems
> very
> > unlikely that they're going to get a 5.3 out in the near future.  There
> is
> > apparently only one person who reviews and commits patches and no ongoing
> > development apart from that.  There is some interest in testing a release
> > candidate (and I volunteered myself) but I'm not sure that there's anyone
> > available to build one.
> >
> > In the light of this, could we discuss the possibility of bringing an
> > non-release build into Harmony?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sian
> >
> >
> > [1]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/bcel-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg01034.html
> >
> >
> > On 12/06/2008, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, they probably does not know that someone needs their new release
> :)
> > >
> > > 2008/6/12, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>:
> > > > Yes, the latest available source does seem to support all the needed
> > > >  features.  There are a few useful methods that I would expect to see
> > > there
> > > >  that are missing, but they can be worked around fairly easily.
> > > >
> > > >  I agree in general that it's not good practice to unneccesarily
> switch
> > > to
> > > >  unreleased versions, but in the case of BCEL when the last release
> was
> > 2
> > > >  years ago and the code base has been very stable for a number of
> years
> > > due
> > > >  to little active development I wouldn't think the risk is very
> > > high.  Also
> > > >  the only dependencies are from pack200 and Yoko, so it doesn't
> affect
> > > that
> > > >  much of the class library.
> > > >
> > > >  However I have been assuming that a 5.3 in the near future is
> > unlikely,
> > > but
> > > >  as you say it would be worth asking on their mailing list, so I will
> > do
> > > that
> > > >  first.
> > > >
> > > >  Thanks,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  Sian
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  On 12/06/2008, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >  >
> > > >  > Does latest available sources support all the needed features?
> > > >  > We also can write a message BCEL developers to understand current
> > > >  > status of the sources. It is probably not the best idea to switch
> to
> > > >  > bleeding sources..
> > > >  >
> > > >  > SY, Alexey
> > > >  >
> > > >  > 2008/6/12, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>:
> > > >  > > We're currently using BCEL 5.2 in Harmony, which is the latest
> > > released
> > > >  > >  version (from June 2006).  However it doesn't support all
the
> > Java
> > > 5
> > > >  > class
> > > >  > >  file features, which is making it complicated to implement
> > pack200
> > > (and
> > > >  > also
> > > >  > >  means that javap won't print Java 5 stuff properly when we
have
> > > >  > one).  There
> > > >  > >  is support for these features in HEAD, but I don't think
> there's
> > > much
> > > >  > active
> > > >  > >  development going on in BCEL and I can't find any information
> > about
> > > when
> > > >  > a
> > > >  > >  possible 5.3 might be released.
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >  I'd like to propose upgrading Harmony to the latest available
> > > source for
> > > >  > >  BCEL.  Does that sound possible?
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >  Thanks,
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >  Sian
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >
> > > >  > >  --
> > > >  > >  Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > >  > >  IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales
> with
> > > number
> > > >  > >  741598.
> > > >  > >  Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> > Hampshire
> > > PO6
> > > >  > 3AU
> > > >  > >
> > > >  >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > >  IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> > number
> > > >  741598.
> > > >  Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
> PO6
> > > 3AU
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> > 741598.
> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> 3AU
> >
>



-- 
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

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