On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:34:20AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> If AWT / GUI stuff is a particular problem (which is my understanding), > >> I think it would make sense to define virtual packages java1-awt-runtime > >> (and possibly java2-swing-runtime). > > > >This is not a bad proposal at all. It would actually make some things easier. > > > >What do other people say about this? > > I think it is good. > > >They actually do not need the number in them. java-awt-runtime should > >be ok as there is no (correct?) difference between java1 and java2 when it > >comes to awt. > > Incorrect. The AWT under 1.0.2, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 all have various > differences with respect to which methods are available and/or > deprecated on many of the AWT objects. Many of the non-Sun > implementations of AWT don't even bother to declare (much less > implement) the deprecated methods, meaning that code written for > the 1.0.2 common denominator supported by most older web browsers > doesn't work.
Ohh well... > >Same applies to swing, or? > > Same problems with Swing, slightly simplified by the fact that it > didn't exist under 1.0.2. Ohh my. Well we could enfoce that even depricated functions has to be at least declared. Regards, // Ola > - Alex > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- --------------------- Ola Lundqvist --------------------------- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / ---------------------------------------------------------------
