Re: [cme-dev] plans for 3.1?

[Andrew Clement <CLEMAS@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The class files from a 1.5 compile should be readable by existing bytecode
toolkits with no problems, it is simply that without upgrading those
toolkits they won't be able to (cleanly!) access information like:

- whether classes represent annotation/enum types
- original signatures of generic methods that have been lost due to erasure
when compiling
- annotations on types/methods/fields/packages/enums/annotations

I've recently upgraded BCEL to Java5 so that I can access all these things
for AspectJ 5.

Andy.



                                                                           
             Phil Quitslund                                                
             <pq@xxxxxxxxxx>                                               
             Sent by:                                                   To 
             cme-dev-bounces@e         "CME developers' discussion"        
             clipse.org                <cme-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>               
                                                                        cc 
                                                                           
             02/06/2005 17:32                                      Subject 
                                       Re: [cme-dev] plans for 3.1?        
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
             "CME developers'                                              
                discussion"                                                
             <cme-dev@eclipse.                                             
                   org>                                                    
                                                                           
                                                                           




Thanks Harold,

It would be great to have CME running under 3.1 so I'm happy you're looking
into
it!  A few points inline:

> As regards Java5 awareness, there are, unfortunately, no plans by our
group
> to address this. I do want to get the system working on code that doesn't
> leverage the Java 5 extensions but is compiled with the Java 5 compiler
and
> run with its runtime. I'm not expecting problems there, and hope I am
> right.

I hope you're right about this last point but I admit I'm less optimistic.
As I
understand it, the classfile format underwent some changes in 1.5 that I
expect
will break tools like JikesBT that are tooled around the old format.  That
said,
the problems may not be too hard to fix (especially not for the authors,
some of
whom are at hand?)

> It would be great if someone in the community wanted to pick up handling
> the Java 5 extensions!

I agree, and if I had more time I might be foolish enough to offer ;).
Anyway,
for now Andrew is keeping me too busy (phew?).

Please keep me posted as you explore the move to 3.1 and especially if you
have
to shelve it for any amount of time.  I might be able to help you chase
bugs...

Thanks!


-phil

_______________________________________________
cme-dev mailing list
cme-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cme-dev