Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Language IDEs » Objectteams » Binary (in)compatibility?
Binary (in)compatibility? [message #507824] Thu, 14 January 2010 19:19 Go to next message
Stephan Herrmann is currently offline Stephan Herrmann
Messages: 1024
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
I've just started working on a ticket that will introduce a binary
incompatibility. If this feature will be included in the next
milestone this will imply, that old OT/J .class files cannot
be used with the new runtime environment.

By this post I'm asking for feedback how big a problem such
incompatibility would impose on everybody. At all times, re-compiling
existing sources will suffice, since source-level compatibility is
not affected.

This is about http://trac.objectteams.org/ot/ticket/144 :
"Allow teams extending a non-team class".
I'm introducing a new interfaces org.objectteams.ITeam, which
will be used in many locations that until now use the class
org.objectteams.Team. Specifically, if a team class extends
a non-team class, the compiler will implicitly insert
"implements org.objectteams.ITeam" instead of
"extends org.objectteams.Team".

Several internal, generated methods currently mention class Team,
which will be changed, too. Thus the incompatibility.

So, please speak up if you're seeing problems with this change.
I would have to try hard to add a compatibility mode or back out
the current work.

Stephan
Re: Binary (in)compatibility? [message #507962 is a reply to message #507824] Fri, 15 January 2010 10:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Miguel P. Monteiro is currently offline Miguel P. Monteiro
Messages: 3
Registered: January 2010
Junior Member
No reservations whatsoever from our part, but I would like to say that enabling teams to inherit from plain Java classes seems a very desirable feature.
The less asymmetrical the language is, the better. I imagine that will make it easier to use/integrate traditional OO frameworks that rely on hooks and inheritance for composition.

Best,
--
Miguel P. Monteiro | cell phone +351 96 700 35 45
Departamento de Informatica | Phone +351 21 294 8536 ext. 10708
Faculdade Ciencias e Tecnol.| Fax: +351 21 294 8541
Universidade Nova de Lisboa | URL: http://ctp.di.fct.unl.pt/~mpm
2829-516 Caparica, PORTUGAL | Skype: miguel.p.monteiro
Re: Binary (in)compatibility? [message #567644 is a reply to message #507824] Fri, 15 January 2010 10:38 Go to previous message
Miguel P. Monteiro is currently offline Miguel P. Monteiro
Messages: 3
Registered: January 2010
Junior Member
No reservations whatsoever from our part, but I would like to say that enabling teams to inherit from plain Java classes seems a very desirable feature.
The less asymmetrical the language is, the better. I imagine that will make it easier to use/integrate traditional OO frameworks that rely on hooks and inheritance for composition.

Best,
--
Miguel P. Monteiro | cell phone +351 96 700 35 45
Departamento de Informatica | Phone +351 21 294 8536 ext. 10708
Faculdade Ciencias e Tecnol.| Fax: +351 21 294 8541
Universidade Nova de Lisboa | URL: http://ctp.di.fct.unl.pt/~mpm
2829-516 Caparica, PORTUGAL | Skype: miguel.p.monteiro
Previous Topic:Binary (in)compatibility?
Next Topic:Role migration - is it really needed?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Oct 24 11:33:28 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01670 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software