AWT peers (Was: [PATCH] More List fixes)

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi,

(Moved to address@hidden/address@hidden and added Chris and
Stephane since they both work on AWT peers.)

On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 00:20, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2003, at 1:09 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > There's been some discussion about trying to make our peers conform to
> > the JDK specification, even though it is undocumented.  It turns out
> > there are other peer implementations around, it might be useful to let
> > them work with our implementation.
> 
> > What do you think about the compatibility idea?
> 
> Are there any independently developed peer implementations (for Sun's 
> JRE) that work with anything newer than JDK1.1? I'm not aware of any.
> 
> Compatibility would be difficult given that there is no published spec, 
> also the interface is no doubt quite complex. The benefits would be 
> questionable - it would let us run our peers on Sun's JDK for debugging 
> purposes, but I don't think that advantage is worth the effort that 
> would be involved.
> 
> In the long run, however, it may well be worth stabilizing and 
> documenting _our_ peer interface so that others can develop peers 
> independently of libgcj.

The only free AWT peer implementation I know of is PJA (Pure Java AWT).
But I haven't tried it with any of the free VMs and our awt
implementation. http://www.eteks.com/pja/en/

Both Chris and Stephane are working on AWT peers so they might have an
opinion.

Cheers,

Mark

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part