[kaffe] Re: kaffe needlessly rejects foo.class input
avdyk at ressource-toi.org
Sat Nov 27 02:35:19 PST 2004
Do you plan to apply this patch? If not, I'll apply it on the debian package.
Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:54:27 +0200,
Konstantinos Margaritis <markos at debian.gr> wrote:
> On Πεμ 25 Νοε 2004 02:40, Kiyo Inaba wrote:
>> I am wondering, your patch may reject proper (as far as I know)
>> file name like 'foo.class.class' to be rejected. Is it illegal to
>> use names like that?
> I just consulted some more knowledgeable people than me on this on
> irc, here is the discussion (with permission):
> <markos_> hey, wrt to the last mail from Kiyo Inaba, are class names
> of the form name.class illegal? (so that the source is
> name.class.java and the class name is name.class.class)
> <dalibor> shoot
> <markos_> i'm pretty sure that they should be illegal, but i'd like to
> be sure...
> <dalibor> uh.
> <markos_> i sent a patch to avdyk, so that kjc would reject a class
> called with the extension .class (ie java name.class)
> <dalibor> i don't think name.something.java is a legal file name for
> javac because it messes up the class lookup
> <dalibor> as . signifies directories, actually.
> <dalibor> (exceot the . before java)
> <markos_> ah, that clarifies it
> <markos_> i'll quote you in my response :-)
> <dalibor> you could cc: tromey, too ;)
> <markos_> i'll cc kaffe at kaffe.org
> <dalibor> sounds good.
> So, I guess it's ok to reject the extension .class from a class name.
> kaffe mailing list
> kaffe at kaffe.org
Free and Open Source Developers' European Meeting
February 26-27 2005,
More information about the kaffe