[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [equinox-dev] dependency on org.osgi.annotation?
- From: Stephan Herrmann <stephan.herrmann@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 00:52:33 +0200
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
I'm not responding to any of that religious anti-PDE flame war
which is totally inappropriate in this discussion.
On 05/08/2015 10:21 AM, BJ Hargrave wrote:
Well I suggest that (1) JDT not have a fatal error here since the goal is not to generate a class file
Sounds like the obvious way to go, sure.
Just note that reporting this kind of error is not connected
to generating class files but to the semantic analysis,
which indeed is desired in this use case - which only means:
it's not as easy as just stopping before class file generation.
Continuing compilation on broken input is a main contributor
to complexity of this already very complex component.
That's why avoiding unnecessarily broken input sounds like
a much nicer option.
and (2) PDE should ... support a
way to specify compile dependencies different than runtime dependencies
Well, if that's what the OSGi spec says, it shouldn't be hard
to convince PDE ...