[Isolate-interest] deafening silence about refactored APIs

[Pete Soper]

"Curt Cox" <ccox@tripos.com> said:
> > There are no enums in CDC or CLDC, only latest J2SE.
> Yes and no.  There may not be language support for enums in
> CDC or CLDC, but there are plenty of ways of rolling your own.
> 
> Chapter 5, Substitutes for C Constructs
> http://java.sun.com/developer/Books/effectivejava/Chapter5.pdf
> 
> Writing enums before Tiger
> http://weblogs.java.net/pub/wlg/643
> 
> Are you saying that CDC or CLDC are so constrained that adding
> an extra class for type-safety would cost too much in terms
> of resources?  

Yes, absolutely for CLDC, assuming we're already way too large and at
least one J2ME authority has judged our base package way too large.

> As primarily a J2SE developer, I hope not.
> 
> > Yes. A custom launcher is required and hooks have to be put into a few of
> > the core library implementations and trickery with paths and the like
> force
> > this resulting "isolate launcher" to become "not Java."
> 
> Perhaps.  When there are tests that nobody can get a pure-Java
> implementation to pass, then that will be more of a fact.

I was writing about the fact that you can't play with boot class paths,
for example, and use the name "Java" with the resulting implementation.
This is another way of saying that we wouldn't want to confuse the RI with
a Java implementation delivering the APIs.

Regards,
Pete