cannot leave out deprecated methods, period (was: Re: Java)

[Ian Darwin <ia...@darwinsys.com>]

On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 05:47:35PM +0100, FaeLLe wrote:
> But im still curious do you think TCK checks if Harmony would have 
> implementations of the deprecated methods or can we just spraingly and 
> judging the needs implement a selected few of those.

The TCP probably checks for these deprecated methods, but that isn't the point.

Look, if you're going to all the trouble of reimplementing all of Java you might
as well get used to the idea of doing various things that are boring or
tedious just because you have to. If you don't like that, go play somewhere
else. Period.

Not to mention that it really doesn't save you all that much. The %-age that is
deprecated out of the entire J2SE API is fairly small.

Think about System.getEnv(). OK, then deprecated but worked, then deprecated
but threw an exception, and now not deprecated and works again.

You do not leave something out just because it's deprecated.  Please do not
keep harping on this issue, so people can focus on the (daunting) task at hand.

Re: cannot leave out deprecated methods, period (was: Re: Java)

[Ricky Clarkson <ri...@gmail.com>]

Anyway, as I have discovered by overriding deprecated methods from the
API, and experiencing the associated bugs, Sun calls its own
deprecated code, so it's not *that* deprecated. ;)

Some apps rely on deprecated code.  In fact, most Swing apps probably
do, seeing as JDialog.show() is now deprecated (well, Dialog.show(),
which is inherited).

On 11/05/05, Ian Darwin <ia...@darwinsys.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 05:47:35PM +0100, FaeLLe wrote:
> > But im still curious do you think TCK checks if Harmony would have
> > implementations of the deprecated methods or can we just spraingly and
> > judging the needs implement a selected few of those.
> 
> The TCP probably checks for these deprecated methods, but that isn't the point.
> 
> Look, if you're going to all the trouble of reimplementing all of Java you might
> as well get used to the idea of doing various things that are boring or
> tedious just because you have to. If you don't like that, go play somewhere
> else. Period.
> 
> Not to mention that it really doesn't save you all that much. The %-age that is
> deprecated out of the entire J2SE API is fairly small.
> 
> Think about System.getEnv(). OK, then deprecated but worked, then deprecated
> but threw an exception, and now not deprecated and works again.
> 
> You do not leave something out just because it's deprecated.  Please do not
> keep harping on this issue, so people can focus on the (daunting) task at hand.
>

Re: cannot leave out deprecated methods, period (was: Re: Java)

[FaeLLe <mr...@gmail.com>]

Very well stated and agreed with you fully.

I was just on about it so i could find out from someone who had tested it 
with the TCK.

Also if the TCK is a read only license how / who / when will Harmony be 
tested with it ? Will we have to pull strings in Sun and be at their calling 
to undergo that test. Or as a worst case scenario verify compatiblity by 
examining TCK source :/


On 5/11/05, Ian Darwin <ia...@darwinsys.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 05:47:35PM +0100, FaeLLe wrote:
> > But im still curious do you think TCK checks if Harmony would have
> > implementations of the deprecated methods or can we just spraingly and
> > judging the needs implement a selected few of those.
> 
> The TCP probably checks for these deprecated methods, but that isn't the 
> point.
> 
> Look, if you're going to all the trouble of reimplementing all of Java you 
> might
> as well get used to the idea of doing various things that are boring or
> tedious just because you have to. If you don't like that, go play 
> somewhere
> else. Period.
> 
> Not to mention that it really doesn't save you all that much. The %-age 
> that is
> deprecated out of the entire J2SE API is fairly small.
> 
> Think about System.getEnv(). OK, then deprecated but worked, then 
> deprecated
> but threw an exception, and now not deprecated and works again.
> 
> You do not leave something out just because it's deprecated. Please do not
> keep harping on this issue, so people can focus on the (daunting) task at 
> hand.
> 



-- 
www.FaeLLe.com <http://www.FaeLLe.com>