You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2001/04/04 18:42:36 UTC
[Bug 1213] New - Link compiler's used by Javac and EJBJar tasks
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1213
*** shadow/1213 Wed Apr 4 09:42:35 2001
--- shadow/1213.tmp.2115 Wed Apr 4 09:42:35 2001
***************
*** 0 ****
--- 1,35 ----
+ +============================================================================+
+ | Link compiler's used by Javac and EJBJar tasks |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | Bug #: 1213 Product: Ant |
+ | Status: NEW Version: 1.3 |
+ | Resolution: Platform: PC |
+ | Severity: Enhancement OS/Version: |
+ | Priority: Component: Optional Tasks |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | Assigned To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org |
+ | Reported By: david.ventimiglia@msdw.com |
+ | CC list: Cc: |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | URL: |
+ +============================================================================+
+ | DESCRIPTION |
+ The Javac task makes use of the build.compiler property to determine the
+ compiler it should use (javac, jikes, etc.). The EJBJar task uses an attribute
+ in the nested Weblogic element to do the same thing (the attribute
+ is 'compiler'). It would be nice if either
+
+ 1) EJBJar used the build.compiler property just as Javac does. This would
+ effectively link the two tasks ensuring they use the same compiler. I've had
+ UnmarshallingExceptions galore when using EJBs where container classes are
+ generated using Javac but the bean classes are compiled using Jikes. This
+ option is a little less flexible.
+
+ 2) Javac used an attribute to control the compiler, the same way that EJBJar
+ does. This way, they could be linked by a property if that's what you want,
+ but it's flexible enough to have them use seperate compilers if THAT's what you
+ want (for whatever reason).
+
+ Not a high priority, since I'm sure there's a workaround right now.
+ Thanks,
+ David