From: <bc...@wo...> - 2000-10-19 15:45:11
|
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:19:19 +0200 (MET DST), you wrote: >I have subscribed to the sourceforge lists and so I have received the last mail >from Finn (twice). >Have I missed something in between? Not from me. >Things seem to get clearer both for semantic and possible implementation >up to Barry inputs. > >... > >I clarified to myself that jythonc should build the list, use the new >order dealing with imports but it is not necessary that it find out >that a py pkg is also a java pkg :). The modified runtime support >can deal with this. I can make this change. Py.initProxy will then get a new "String[] modules" argument. I'll make it a patch,, i.e I will not commit this until we have settled the complete semantic change. >But there is another issue: I have not yet analyzed it in depth. > >One can compile a set of py modules/py pkg under a user-defined >java pkg (package jythonc option) so for example py mod x.y >will be userpkg.x.y. > >If the code in interpreted mode load a java class x.JClass what should do >at runtime the same code when compiled and put in the pkg userpkg, >just still try to load x.JClass or userpkg.x.JClass, try both. x.JClass IMO. The --package option to jpythonc should only be for the generated code, not for the entire world. >In any case something like java.lang.* should still be loaded as java.lang.*. >Can we separate the different cases? What is the more coherent semantic that >can be actually implemented? regards, finn |