Re: [classlib][jdwp] Use java 6 branch JDWP in java 5 builds?

[Mark Hindess <ma...@googlemail.com>]

In message <4A...@googlemail.com>, Oliver Deakin writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> Ok, I wrote a quick Java class to scan all the source from the Java 5 
> and 6 JDWP trees and pull out the JVMTI functions called, then compare 
> the two lists to each other to see the differences. I found that in the 
> Java 6 version we use the following 10 functions not available in Java 5 
> JVMTI:
> 
> GetClassVersionNumbers
> ForceEarlyReturnDouble/Float/Void/Long/Int/Object
> GetOwnedMonitorStackDepthInfo
> FollowReferences
> GetConstantPool
> 
> I had a scan through the JDWP source containing these function calls and 
> they all reside in JDWP event handlers which are Java 6 only, so I 
> believe in a Java 5 debugging environment no Java 6 JVMTI calls should 
> ever be made.

Excellent.  I don't see much point in maintaining two copies.
 
> Im going to start investigating the test failures I see running the JDWP 
> suites with the Java 6 agent to make sure they are not caused by any 
> other use of Java 6 features I may have missed.

I'm just doing another merge of jdktools/trunk to
jdktools/branches/java6 and out of curiosity I checked the diff between
trunk and java6 (excluding modules/jpda) and there were no differences
except the merge changes I am testing.

I wonder if we really need a java6 jdktools branch - we could always
recreate it if we need it and at the moment it just seems to be
overhead.

Regards,
 Mark

Re: [classlib][jdwp] Use java 6 branch JDWP in java 5 builds?

[Oliver Deakin <ol...@googlemail.com>]

Mark Hindess wrote:
> In message <4A...@googlemail.com>, Oliver Deakin writes:
>   
>> [snip]Im going to start investigating the test failures I see running the JDWP 
>> suites with the Java 6 agent to make sure they are not caused by any 
>> other use of Java 6 features I may have missed.
>>     
>
> I'm just doing another merge of jdktools/trunk to
> jdktools/branches/java6 and out of curiosity I checked the diff between
> trunk and java6 (excluding modules/jpda) and there were no differences
> except the merge changes I am testing.
>   

That's good to know, thanks.

> I wonder if we really need a java6 jdktools branch - we could always
> recreate it if we need it and at the moment it just seems to be
> overhead.
>   

Yep, I agree - Im looking at the JDWP test failures in the Java 6 branch 
at the moment and will be raising JIRAs for them. If they can be 
resolved then I think we will be in a good position to take JDWP in the 
Java 6 branch as head and remove that branch altogether.

Regards,
Oliver

> Regards,
>  Mark
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Oliver Deakin
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU