incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [compatibility] Do we want to be Java5 compatible?
Date Fri, 24 Nov 2006 07:19:41 GMT
2006/11/23, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
> Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> > Do we want to be Java5 compatible?
> >
> > Yes, I understand that Yoko is CORBA 2.4 while Java5 and even 6 are
> > CORBA 2.3. This means that it is impossible to create fully compatible
> > version since it will require downgrading Yoko and this is not a
> > choice.
> Why is that true?
> Does CORBA 2.4 not include a complete CORBA 2.3?
Fully compatible means "both directions" for me.

> >
> >  From the other hand we can try to achieve backward compatibility and
> > let applications designed for Java5 CORBA work with Yoko.
> > I believe that it would be good for Yoko. And yes, it is absolutely
> > required for Harmony :)
> >
> > I've attached html with the latest JAPI results. Current JAPI score is
> > 84.68%.
> > The main problems for now is missing functionality: 2 packages, 21
> > classes, 12 interfaces, 72 methods.
> >
> > Is it possible to implement all this things?
> >
> > Some of the classes seems to be renamed in Yoko. For example there is
> > org.omg.DynamicAny._DynAnyStub class in Java5 and
> > org.omg.DynamicAny.DynAnyStub in Yoko. Will it be OK to rename such
> > classes? Or it will be better to create a wrapper?
> >
> > Another example of incompatibility: method
> > org.omg.CORBA.LocalObject._get_interface(): type org.omg.CORBA.Object
> > in jdk15.org.omg, but type org.omg.CORBA.InterfaceDef in
> > harmony.org.omg
> > InterfaceDef is subinterface of org.omg.CORBA.Object. Will it be OK to
> > change the return type in Yoko? It will probably require some code
> > refactoring...
> >
> > And so on...
> >
> > Thoughts? Objections?
> >
> > SY, Alexey
>

Mime
View raw message