You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to bsf-dev@jakarta.apache.org by sebb <se...@gmail.com> on 2009/03/25 12:24:33 UTC
BSF 3.0 progress
I think the javax.script classes are nearly ready.
There are one or two unit tests still needed and the Javadoc needs a
final going over.
The bsf-utils component includes an HTTP component and an XML
component. However, HTTP does not seem to be complete, and the
ScriptEnginePool is definitely not complete or bug free.
The XML component has comments regarding temporary code for beta2, and
this is referenced in the ScriptEngineManager.initXMLHelper() method -
should this code still be there?
If so, the Release Notes should note that these classes are not complete.
==
There's almost no documentation on BSF 3.0 - the existing
documentation is all about BSF 2, which is completely different.
There's also no information on upgrading.
I think these need fixing before a formal (non-beta) release of 3.0 can be made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: BSF 3.0 progress
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25/03/2009, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25/03/2009, Rony G. Flatscher <Ro...@wu-wien.ac.at> wrote:
> > Hi Sebb,
> >
> > just for the record: the final specifications of JSR-223 (probably with
> > more information than with the Java 6 docs) can be found here:
> > <http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr223/index.html>.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> >
> > sebb wrote:
> > > I think the javax.script classes are nearly ready.
> > > There are one or two unit tests still needed and the Javadoc needs a
> > > final going over.
> > >
> > > The bsf-utils component includes an HTTP component and an XML
> > > component. However, HTTP does not seem to be complete, and the
> > > ScriptEnginePool is definitely not complete or bug free.
> > >
> > > The XML component has comments regarding temporary code for beta2, and
> > > this is referenced in the ScriptEngineManager.initXMLHelper() method -
> > > should this code still be there?
> > >
> > > If so, the Release Notes should note that these classes are not complete.
> > >
> >
> > +1
>
>
> OK, I'm currently adding details on the (few) API changes I have made.
>
>
> >
> >
> > > ==
> > >
> > > There's almost no documentation on BSF 3.0 - the existing
> > > documentation is all about BSF 2, which is completely different.
> > > There's also no information on upgrading.
> > >
> > > I think these need fixing before a formal (non-beta) release of 3.0 can be made.
> > >
> >
> > Maybe. :)
> >
> > Seriously, I think too that a section on BSF-3 needs to be added that
> > points out that
> >
> > * BSF-3.0 is not compatible with BSF-2.4, but an opensource
> > implemenation of JSR-223 a.k.a. "Java 6 scripting",
> > * BSF-3.0 can be deployed and used starting with Java 1.4.2 (no
> > dependency on Java 6),
> > * that there are plans to bridge both frameworks by eventually
> > supplying a BSF 2.4 engine that bridges all BSF 3 scripting
> > languages [based on ant's engine], and a BSF 3.0 engine that
> > bridges all BSF 2.4 scripting languages (this would allow a smooth
> > migration path to BSF 3.0),
> > * BSF-2.4 remains maintained for those who have been using it.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > ---rony
> >
> >
> > P.S.: Asked Geir for the TCK-223. If that does not work out, I try to
> > get it for private use from Mike Grogan as a member of JSR-223.
>
>
> It might be interesting to run the JUnit tests against the Java 6
> implementation.
> That would help show if the tests agree with the spec., but of course
> won't reveal any missing tests.
>
> Not sure how easy it will be to ignore the local classes - I might
> have to create a temporary Eclipse project and copy the code over.
Just done that - and the tests seem to work OK with Sun Java 1.6.0_11,
once I added the resources section to the classpath so it could pick
up the Test Factory.
Probably means I've not written enough tests ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: BSF 3.0 progress
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25/03/2009, Rony G. Flatscher <Ro...@wu-wien.ac.at> wrote:
> Hi Sebb,
>
> just for the record: the final specifications of JSR-223 (probably with
> more information than with the Java 6 docs) can be found here:
> <http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr223/index.html>.
Thanks.
>
> sebb wrote:
> > I think the javax.script classes are nearly ready.
> > There are one or two unit tests still needed and the Javadoc needs a
> > final going over.
> >
> > The bsf-utils component includes an HTTP component and an XML
> > component. However, HTTP does not seem to be complete, and the
> > ScriptEnginePool is definitely not complete or bug free.
> >
> > The XML component has comments regarding temporary code for beta2, and
> > this is referenced in the ScriptEngineManager.initXMLHelper() method -
> > should this code still be there?
> >
> > If so, the Release Notes should note that these classes are not complete.
> >
>
> +1
OK, I'm currently adding details on the (few) API changes I have made.
>
>
> > ==
> >
> > There's almost no documentation on BSF 3.0 - the existing
> > documentation is all about BSF 2, which is completely different.
> > There's also no information on upgrading.
> >
> > I think these need fixing before a formal (non-beta) release of 3.0 can be made.
> >
>
> Maybe. :)
>
> Seriously, I think too that a section on BSF-3 needs to be added that
> points out that
>
> * BSF-3.0 is not compatible with BSF-2.4, but an opensource
> implemenation of JSR-223 a.k.a. "Java 6 scripting",
> * BSF-3.0 can be deployed and used starting with Java 1.4.2 (no
> dependency on Java 6),
> * that there are plans to bridge both frameworks by eventually
> supplying a BSF 2.4 engine that bridges all BSF 3 scripting
> languages [based on ant's engine], and a BSF 3.0 engine that
> bridges all BSF 2.4 scripting languages (this would allow a smooth
> migration path to BSF 3.0),
> * BSF-2.4 remains maintained for those who have been using it.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> ---rony
>
>
> P.S.: Asked Geir for the TCK-223. If that does not work out, I try to
> get it for private use from Mike Grogan as a member of JSR-223.
It might be interesting to run the JUnit tests against the Java 6
implementation.
That would help show if the tests agree with the spec., but of course
won't reveal any missing tests.
Not sure how easy it will be to ignore the local classes - I might
have to create a temporary Eclipse project and copy the code over.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: BSF 3.0 progress
Posted by "Rony G. Flatscher" <Ro...@wu-wien.ac.at>.
Hi Sebb,
just for the record: the final specifications of JSR-223 (probably with
more information than with the Java 6 docs) can be found here:
<http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr223/index.html>.
sebb wrote:
> I think the javax.script classes are nearly ready.
> There are one or two unit tests still needed and the Javadoc needs a
> final going over.
>
> The bsf-utils component includes an HTTP component and an XML
> component. However, HTTP does not seem to be complete, and the
> ScriptEnginePool is definitely not complete or bug free.
>
> The XML component has comments regarding temporary code for beta2, and
> this is referenced in the ScriptEngineManager.initXMLHelper() method -
> should this code still be there?
>
> If so, the Release Notes should note that these classes are not complete.
>
+1
> ==
>
> There's almost no documentation on BSF 3.0 - the existing
> documentation is all about BSF 2, which is completely different.
> There's also no information on upgrading.
>
> I think these need fixing before a formal (non-beta) release of 3.0 can be made.
>
Maybe. :)
Seriously, I think too that a section on BSF-3 needs to be added that
points out that
* BSF-3.0 is not compatible with BSF-2.4, but an opensource
implemenation of JSR-223 a.k.a. "Java 6 scripting",
* BSF-3.0 can be deployed and used starting with Java 1.4.2 (no
dependency on Java 6),
* that there are plans to bridge both frameworks by eventually
supplying a BSF 2.4 engine that bridges all BSF 3 scripting
languages [based on ant's engine], and a BSF 3.0 engine that
bridges all BSF 2.4 scripting languages (this would allow a smooth
migration path to BSF 3.0),
* BSF-2.4 remains maintained for those who have been using it.
Regards,
---rony
P.S.: Asked Geir for the TCK-223. If that does not work out, I try to
get it for private use from Mike Grogan as a member of JSR-223.