Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [aspectj-dev] AspectJ compiler moved to Eclipse 3.0 M6 JDT base

Will Java 1.4 be required to run the compiler (standalone)?

I assumed so because the 3.0 download page says as much, but ajc
seems to run fine right now under 1.3.  The more VM's the better!

The build process currently forces the compile to target 1.3
to preserve 1.3 binary compatibility.  Have we decided to use
-target 1.4 or use -source 1.4?  To state the obvious, target
1.4 would reduce the VM variants in release testing, and
source 1.4 would enable asserts, to help avoid or isolate bugs.

Wes

Adrian Colyer wrote:

Some of you may have noticed a larger-than-usual commit to the CVS tree earlier today. Jim and I - that's mostly Jim with me playing assistant - committed the update that moves the org.eclipse.jdt.core in the aspectj distribution up to the 3.0 M6 JDT compiler level. This will have to be updated once more when 3.0 becomes final, but we believe the bulk of the work has been done to make this next update more palatable when the time comes. As well as picking up all the fixes (and any new bugs) introduced into the jdt compiler in the 3.0 stream, this change also picks up a significant change in the default behaviour of the eclipse java compiler :- the default compilation mode is now 1.4 compliance. The byte codes generated in 1.4 compliant mode preserve the static type of the receiver in a call, rather than replacing with the root defining type as happens under 1.3. The change in behaviour flushed out a few additional bugs in AspectJ which have also been fixed and the test cases updated. The readme-1.2 file has yet to be updated (created) to document the change in default compliance level. The change will work hand-in-hand with the enhancement committed into the tree last week to warn (Xlint) when a declaring type pattern is used in a call pcd in such a way that likely desired matches are excluded.

-- Adrian
Adrian_Colyer@xxxxxxxxxx



Back to the top