mockobjects-java-dev

[MO-java-dev] Compiling under JDK1.4?

[Scott L. <sl...@sl...>]

When will mockobjects be able to compile under JDK 1.4? It does not now 
- the SQL stuff does not implement nearly all of the necessary interfaces.

I had this working in April, but you didn't like my approach - 
automatically generating all the stuff that throws 
NotImplementedException, getting rid of a bunch of existing code in 
there as well as fixing this problem, at the expense of a slightly more 
complicated build.xml.

What approach would you like? It would be easy to paste the generated 
code into the source files. As much as I don't like that way, it would 
work. And I really would like to see it working under 1.4. Keeping 1.3 
around just for this is silly.

--
Scott Lamb

Re: [MO-java-dev] Compiling under JDK1.4?

[Jeff M. <je...@mk...>]

On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 00:08, Scott Lamb wrote:
> When will mockobjects be able to compile under JDK 1.4? It does not now 
> - the SQL stuff does not implement nearly all of the necessary interfaces.

Sorry hadn't realized this was the case.

> 
> I had this working in April, but you didn't like my approach - 
> automatically generating all the stuff that throws 
> NotImplementedException, getting rid of a bunch of existing code in 
> there as well as fixing this problem, at the expense of a slightly more 
> complicated build.xml.
> 
> What approach would you like? It would be easy to paste the generated 
> code into the source files. As much as I don't like that way, it would 
> work. And I really would like to see it working under 1.4. Keeping 1.3 
> around just for this is silly.
> 

Probably the thing to do is inherit where possible from the common/1.3
mocks and implement any new methods using notImplemented(); apart from
any that you may need to be fully mocked.

The 1.3 stuff is probably still the code that is primarily used as most
people won't have migrated to 1.4. (Least that's my experience)


> --
> Scott Lamb
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
-- 

Re: [MO-java-dev] Compiling under JDK1.4?

[Scott L. <sl...@sl...>]

On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:15:56AM +0100, Jeff Martin wrote:
> Probably the thing to do is inherit where possible from the common/1.3
> mocks and implement any new methods using notImplemented(); apart from
> any that you may need to be fully mocked.

Hmm, I was thinking more about the single copy in common implementing the
additional functionality. It wouldn't accomplish anything for JDK1.3 and
lower, but I don't think it would hurt anything either.

I don't understand how inheriting from the others would work. Especially
inheriting 1.3 stuff from 1.4 - it compiles ${src.jdk.dir}/${jdk.version}
and ${src.jdk.dir}/common, so a build on 1.4 won't build the 1.3 dir.

With the InterfaceImplementor stuff, this wasn't an issue for the
non-implemented stuff - it just used whatever JDK you are compiling against
to decide what stubs it needed. But of course, it didn't help for the more
interesting, manually-produced code.  I didn't worry about this since I
didn't actually need to use any of the extra JDK 1.4 stuff in question, just
to made it compile.

> The 1.3 stuff is probably still the code that is primarily used as most
> people won't have migrated to 1.4. (Least that's my experience)

*nod* I guess I'm an early adopter. I particularly like a couple JDK 1.4
features, like assertions.

--
Scott Lamb

Re: [MO-java-dev] Compiling under JDK1.4?

[Jeff M. <je...@mk...>]

On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 23:15, Scott Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:15:56AM +0100, Jeff Martin wrote:
> > Probably the thing to do is inherit where possible from the common/1.3
> > mocks and implement any new methods using notImplemented(); apart from
> > any that you may need to be fully mocked.
> 
> Hmm, I was thinking more about the single copy in common implementing the
> additional functionality. It wouldn't accomplish anything for JDK1.3 and
> lower, but I don't think it would hurt anything either.

Yes your absolutely right.

> 
> I don't understand how inheriting from the others would work. Especially
> inheriting 1.3 stuff from 1.4 - it compiles ${src.jdk.dir}/${jdk.version}
> and ${src.jdk.dir}/common, so a build on 1.4 won't build the 1.3 dir.

Again your right (I'm only using half a brain at the moment.)
> 
> With the InterfaceImplementor stuff, this wasn't an issue for the
> non-implemented stuff - it just used whatever JDK you are compiling against
> to decide what stubs it needed. But of course, it didn't help for the more
> interesting, manually-produced code.  I didn't worry about this since I
> didn't actually need to use any of the extra JDK 1.4 stuff in question, just
> to made it compile.

;o)

> 
> > The 1.3 stuff is probably still the code that is primarily used as most
> > people won't have migrated to 1.4. (Least that's my experience)
> 
> *nod* I guess I'm an early adopter. I particularly like a couple JDK 1.4
> features, like assertions.
>

Yeah there's some nice stuff in there, but the whole overriding the
default XML parser stuff is uuch, and I've not been able to get it to
run tomcat without stacktracing. So we're sticking to 1.3 a bit longer.
 
> --
> Scott Lamb
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
--