From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30955 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2002 08:27:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30920 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2002 08:27:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO delenn.fl.net.au) (202.181.0.28) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2002 08:27:51 -0000 Received: from solomon (a5-p25.syd.fl.net.au [202.181.2.25]) by delenn.fl.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA10217FD4B; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 18:30:28 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c1e9d7$7e30eaa0$1902b5ca@solomon> From: "Raif S. Naffah" To: "Bryce McKinlay" , "Nic Ferrier" Cc: "James Williams" , , References: <001e01c1e797$c91c2f30$c47831d2@computer><3CC38926.90804@waitaki.otago.ac.nz> <87znzwck4a.fsf@pooh-sticks-bridge.tapsellferrier.co.uk> Subject: Re: Attention GCJ devel team Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 01:34:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01072.txt.bz2 did the original poster mean when saying "generate ... from javadoc specifications" a. generate the code from the _output_ of the JavaDoc tool, or b. generate the code from .java files (source code) adorned with JavaDoc tags? if it's the latter would that still be legally challenging? cheers; rsn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nic Ferrier" To: "Bryce McKinlay" Cc: "James Williams" ; ; Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: Re: Attention GCJ devel team > Bryce McKinlay writes: > > > James Williams wrote: > > > > >I am currently working on a tool that will generate class stubs complete > > >with javadoc from javadoc specifications. In your FAQ a person > > >mentioned that "Considering that new Java APIs come out every week, it's > > >going to be impossible to track everything." I believe the tool I am > > >developing may reduce this development challenge for you substantially. > > > > > >From my perspective the value of this would be that when a new specification > > >came out, the api converter could be run providing a clean framework > > >complete with all the new and deprecated api's and then the intergrator > > >could copy the existing code from the current libgcj implementation into > > >the new framework. > > > > > > > This sounds like an interesting and useful tool. However, I don't know > > whether or not we can, from a legal perspective, generate code > > directly/automatically from Javadocs. I suspect we'd have to ask the FSF > > legal people whether or not this is safe. > > We had the same issue with ClasspathX and I think the result was that > it's not legal (sun have (c) on the javadoc produced text). > > But I don't have any copy of an FSF mail so you may as well ask again. > > > However, such a tool would still be useful, just as a monitoring tool. > > > Nic > >