Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse-pmc] Add back an old method from 3.3 (detected as an API addition since 3.4M6a)

I think this is an instance of these cases where we have some nonsense in our API (an internal method leaked in), and this forces it to be considered as API per our rules.
Adding it back makes us maximally compatible, no one can blame us for that. It is true that each case is arguable like this...

It is good to see that we know have tools to detect these nonsense...


Jerome Lanneluc/France/IBM@IBMFR
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

05/02/2008 08:57 AM

Please respond to
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
Re: [eclipse-pmc] Add back an old method from 3.3 (detected as an API        addition since 3.4M6a)






Please see my comments below.

Jerome

eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 01/05/2008 03:11:00 PM:

> Actually, it's *not* just a technical detail: It physically adds
> another method object to the class. In a world where people run out
> of permgen space, we can not afford to take that lightly.
Good point. Let's decide that we cannot add any new method for 3.5 :-)
More seriously, if you find that growing the size of .class files
is an issue, then this should be a discussion topic for the arch
call. Should we have some rules where a component cannot add more
than x% new methods in a release? Should there be some static
analysis on each build to control the size of the meta info used
by each component?

>
> Separate from that, adding back the method, with a body that is
> known to fail, also seems bogus -- why would we want people to fail
> at runtime, when removing the method would allow them to detect the
> problem at compile time?
Actually the method is now marked @deprecated, so the misusage will be
detected at compile time. And even if we added the previous method
body back, it would fail in another way as this method is not
*intended* to be called by clients.

>
> McQ.
>
>
> [image removed] Jerome Lanneluc ---04/30/2008 06:05:13 PM---I'm not
> sure why this was brought to the PMC. The method is not API since it
> is clearly stated that

>
> [image removed]
> From:
>
> [image removed]
> Jerome Lanneluc <jerome_lanneluc@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> [image removed]
> To:
>
> [image removed]
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> [image removed]
> Date:
>
> [image removed]
> 04/30/08 06:05 PM
>
> [image removed]
> Subject:
>
> [image removed]
> Re: [eclipse-pmc] Add back an old method from 3.3 (detected as an
> API addition since 3.4M6a)
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm not sure why this was brought to the PMC. The method is not API
> since it is clearly stated that it should not be referenced in 3.3.
> Adding it back is just a technical detail to make the API tooling happy.
>
> Jerome
>

>
> Mike Wilson <Mike_Wilson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 30/04/2008 04:30 PM

>
> Please respond to
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To
>
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> cc
>
> [image removed]
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [eclipse-pmc] Add back an old method from 3.3 (detected as an
> API addition since 3.4M6a)
>
> [image removed]
>
> [image removed]
>
>
>
>
> This brings up an interesting discussion about how religiously we
> have to adhere to our API conventions. Somehow adding this method
> back, just to make the API tool happy, seems odd (particularly,
> since it doesn't work any more). Should we not just add an entry to
> the porting guide instead?
>
> McQ.
>
>
> [image removed] Olivier Thomann---04/29/2008 10:14:19 PM---GOALS/BENEFITS:
>
> Olivier Thomann/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 04/29/08 10:14 PM

>
> Please respond to
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> [image removed]
>
> To
>
> [image removed]
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx, eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> [image removed]
>
> cc
>
> [image removed]
>
> [image removed]
>
> Subject
>
> [image removed]
> [eclipse-pmc] Add back an old method from 3.3 (detected as an API
> addition since 3.4M6a)
>
> [image removed]
>
> [image removed]
>
>
>
> GOALS/BENEFITS:
> - When converting JDT/Core to API tools, a method tagged as internal in an
> API class (org.eclipse.jdt.core.dom.AST) has been removed.
> The tooling detected it. To correct the situation, the old method has been
> added back tagged with @noreference and @deprecated and an empty body.
> This is now detected by the API freeze check.
>
> AFFECTED BUGS:
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=229526
>
> RISKS:
> - None. This method is not used. This comes back to the method signature
> that we had in 3.3.
>
> PERFORMANCE IMPACTS:
> - None.
>
> Cordialement/Regards,
>
> Frédéric
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
> [image removed] _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
>
>
> Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
> Compagnie IBM France
> Siège Social : Tour Descartes, 2, avenue Gambetta, La Défense 5,
> 92400 Courbevoie
> RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
> Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
> Capital Social : 542.737.118 €
> SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 02430
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc


Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siège Social : Tour Descartes, 2, avenue Gambetta, La Défense 5, 92400 Courbevoie
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 542.737.118 €
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 02430
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc


Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siège Social : Tour Descartes, 2, avenue Gambetta, La Défense 5, 92400 Courbevoie
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 542.737.118 €
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 02430

Back to the top