On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 22:01 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 15:24 +0100, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > > > I guess I could keep it on my Github mirror until I have something > > > concrete enough to be merged to trunk. > > > > > I'd prefer to have it in HEAD as long as it's clearly marked as stubs > > (the NotImplementedException I mentioned) and there is work actively > > taking place. > > Then there's always the (slim) possibility someone else can work on it :-) > > That was my original thinking as well. Does the included patch look > better to you? Mark, what do you think about this? I admit to still just not like stubs, however they are setup. If creating branches wasn't such a pain with CVS I would really recommend doing all this on a branch and only merge when ready and it can actually be used with some VM. I guess it is just time to bite the bullet and create some time to move to mercurial and setup some rules about how to create working branches. I won't veto getting this in right now if that is really what you and Andrew want, but I am not particularly excited either. > This patch implements the work-in-progress invokedynamic API stubs described > here: > > http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/dyn/package-summary.html > > The classes don't do anything useful yet and don't even contain all the > specified methods. Might be better to find some other reference to point people at. This screams it isn't finished yet, might move. I don't have a good suggestion though. The java doc in OpenJDK is distributed under the GPL though, but doesn't seem to be online yet. Cheers, Mark
