Hi.
Here is a web page that is titled "JavaDepend - Below are some notes about
makefile dependencies for Java files". On the bottom there is a link to
JavaDeps homepage, which is the tool we use. I just thought that you might
be interested in some other tools as well.
Of course there where some problems because we ise NT workstations, but I
think they where not too hard. Either use Cygwin tools to get bash shell on
NT or write a bit more complex makefiles.
Markku Hintala
markku.hintala@nokia.com
-----Original Message-----
From: EXT pauls@broadvision.com (Paul M. Sander)
To: jrepenning@catapulse.com
Cc: Atul.Bhingarde@alltel.com; ejj@mdli.com; cciug@Rational.Com;
Donavan.Nelson@alltel.com; Kailash.Subramanian@alltel.com
Sent: 2/25/00 11:20 PM
Subject: RE[2]: [cciug] Make Tools
I don't suppose anyone has come up with a "makedepend" for Java,
have they? Perhaps that would be useful to reduce the severity of
this problem.
"Repenning, Jack" <jrepenning@catapulse.com> wrote:
> From: Atul Bhingarde [mailto:Atul.Bhingarde@alltel.com:
>
> However some of the problems ( and subsequent level of support
> from ClearCase ) that I have encountered is ....... I do not know
> if the problems are only related to the java ( javac compiler on
> HPUX ) or general problem.
>
> There are definitely problems between javac and clearmake (completely
> platform-independent - hey, this is Java!). The problem is that
clearmake
> fundamentally supposes that the results of a compilation are
completely
> determined by those things it observes: input files and their
versions,
> environment variables, build script. But with javac, this is not so:
the
> Java language ("import" statement, and file/class/package name mapping
rules
> onto directory trees) is designed to allow javac to do some of the
build
> inference that *make normally does. Javac may, or may not, build
other
> classes as they're referenced from the source it's nominally working
on, and
> that behavior is not controlled by any of those clearmake-monitored
> variables, only by what javac finds lying about in the file system.
This
> variability arises with any version of make, but most makes have such
low
> integrity ideals that they're just as happy with the
magically-appearing
> co-derived objects as they would be with something they made
themselves.
> Clearmake, in the name of the higher integrity guarantees it strives
to
> provide, is not ready to assume that a foo.class built by "javac
foo.java"
> is the same thing as a foo.class that mysteriously appeared while
"javac
> bar.java" was running.
>
> You can avoid this by declaring explicit dependencies in the makefile,
so
> *make knows to build foo.class before ever it attempts bar.class.
Under
> these circumstances, javac will never do anything unexpected, because
the
> higher standards of clearmake explicitly subsume the lower standards
of
> javac (which are plain-make-like). But of course, this puts the poor
human
> into the business of preserving the integrity of the system by
emulating
> what the tools will do ... pretty much the opposite of the labor- and
> error-saving effect you buy tools for in the first place.
>
>
(Included Binary)
>
-- The CEO of my employer requires me to include the following notice in my signature:* This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately. --- Paul M. Sander +1 650 261 5174 | To the medieval era's literate few..., the BroadVision, Inc. | turn of the millenium held a particular alure. 585 Broadway | After all, with the stroke of a quill, the Redwood City, CA 94063 USA | world went from DCCCCLXXXXVIIIJ to...M. | -- Rachel Emma Silverman, Wall St. Journal - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 00:23:30 EDT