Re: [arch] How much of java.* and friends does Harmony need to write. Was: VM/Classlibrary interface

[Sven de Marothy <sv...@physto.se>]

+1 to that!

On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 11:53 -0400, Aaron wrote:
>  From what I understood from this thread (and of course my understanding 
> could be wrong), there is some contention over where to "hide" this 
> Classlib-VM interface and implementation so that user code is least able 
> to use/abuse it.  One suggestion was to use existing package visibility 
> modifiers and stash the classes in java.lang.  Another was to take these 
> classes and put them in a package other than java.lang to keep java.lang 
> "pure" (at which point they presumably would have to be "public").  
> Another was to use classloader or VM "magic" (or perhaps some more 
> sophisticated module publishing scheme) to hide the existence of these 
> classes.
> 
> In my humble opinion, I'm not overly concerned about spending a lot of 
> effort to "hide" this code from application code, because it is already 
> demonstrably wrong to use them (from user code), and with the proper 
> measures one can easily circumvent the security manager and access 
> hidden fields/methods anyway.
> 
> Frankly, 
> move-forward-with-Classpath-design-and-change-in-the-future-if-we-need-to 
> sounds fine to me.
> 
> Aaron
>