Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-05 Thread Takashi Okamoto
At Sun, 2 Dec 2001 15:19:05 -0800 (PST), Craig R. McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I looked at this option a little bit a while back, and have only one > concern -- multiple threads trying to compile at the same time. Ant tasks > generally assume that they don't need to worry about thread

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-02 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Takashi Okamoto wrote: > Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 09:19:37 +0900 > From: Takashi Okamoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > S

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-02 Thread Peter Donald
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001 08:03, Jon Stevens wrote: > on 12/1/01 10:08 AM, "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, tomcat users and developrs! > >> > >> /* I have post this patch twice. This is third time. */ > >> > >> Do you know kjc which is one of the completely opensource Java > >> compi

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread Takashi Okamoto
Hi, Costin. At Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:24:59 -0800 (PST), <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 for the patch, but there's something that bothers me - we are starting > to duplicate what's already present in ant. Next we'll have gcj support, > etc. > How difficult would it be to add an 'ant' compiler adapte

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread Remy Maucherat
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Jon Stevens wrote: > > > > +1 for this patch as it is legal since it uses reflection. > > > > > > Remy > > > > I thought that using reflection to work with GPL code was still considered > > illegal by the FSF. > > As long ASF/jakarta doesn't have a list of 'accepted licences'

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread cmanolache
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Jon Stevens wrote: > > +1 for this patch as it is legal since it uses reflection. > > > > Remy > > I thought that using reflection to work with GPL code was still considered > illegal by the FSF. As long ASF/jakarta doesn't have a list of 'accepted licences' that we can inclu

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread Jon Stevens
on 12/1/01 10:08 AM, "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi, tomcat users and developrs! >> >> /* I have post this patch twice. This is third time. */ >> >> Do you know kjc which is one of the completely opensource Java >> compiler? If not, you can see detail at http://www.dms.at/kop

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread Remy Maucherat
> Hi, tomcat users and developrs! > > /* I have post this patch twice. This is third time. */ > > Do you know kjc which is one of the completely opensource Java > compiler? If not, you can see detail at http://www.dms.at/kopi. > > Accoding to Edouard G. Parmelan's report > (http://rpmfind.net/t

Re: [PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread costinm
Hi Takashi-san, +1 for the patch, but there's something that bothers me - we are starting to duplicate what's already present in ant. Next we'll have gcj support, etc. How difficult would it be to add an 'ant' compiler adapter, that will just use the ant task ? And also use the same ant mechans

[PATCH] about kjc

2001-12-01 Thread Takashi Okamoto
Hi, tomcat users and developrs! /* I have post this patch twice. This is third time. */ Do you know kjc which is one of the completely opensource Java compiler? If not, you can see detail at http://www.dms.at/kopi. Accoding to Edouard G. Parmelan's report (http://rpmfind.net/tools/Kaffe/message