Bytecode generation, Source code mappings, JCov, Future (Patch)
alex at retroduction.org
Wed Apr 23 08:49:07 PDT 2008
On 23.04.2008, at 17:17, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>>>> However it should be sufficient to discuss the implementation.
>>>> As soon as the patch is acceptable I'll submit the SCA.
> I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way. For legal reasons, we cannot
> look at your patch until you have signed the SCA.
I've submitted the SCA yesterday via Fax (sorry, forgot to mention).
> Separately, although the work sounds like it has potential, I don't
> think it is appropriate to consider it for submission at this time.
> You are proposing adding a new output file format for the compiler,
> which is a step that should not be undertaken lightly. I'm not
> saying it needs anything as big as a JSR, but the file format
> should at least go through some sort of design review by the likely
> consumers of such a file. If nothing else, the Serviceability team
> should be involved, so that other JDK tools which might want to use
> the file are considered.
> I've started a thread on serviceability-dev for anyone interested.
> -- Jon
I'm aware of that and I think you are totally right. My intention
with the patch was more kind of "proof-of-concept" and idea
brainstorming how the feature could be implemented - especially as I
agree with you that a formal specification/discussion basis like a
dedicated JSR would probably be overkill. This (the patch) seemed to
me a "more" appropriate way of talking (or at least getting started
talking) about the "same thing". Please just consider it as a
prototype which has nothing to do with the final implementation nor
it was intended to be targeted for "submission and final
integration" ( although I must admit that I am not familiar yet with
the official submission process).
PS: Thanks for getting more people involved
More information about the compiler-dev