Problems with "-implicit:none"

[Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar]

On 14/08/13 15:31, José Cornado wrote:
> It is no fun if the workaround is not posted :-}
>
> I flushed the streams to disk thus creating the *.java. Since the 
> background jvm uses these classes and not the user, the files (*.java 
> and *.class) can be deleted from disk soon after consumption. The disk 
> remains free of clutter.
>
> I can not tell if the compiler processes the imported *.java or just 
> merely checks its presence since the corresponding *.class is already 
> in place.
>
> Hope these two cents help!

Hi Jose,

Thanks for the info, you can probably get more info if you compile your 
files with -verbose option.

Vicente

>
>
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:30 PM, José Cornado <jose.cornado at gmail.com 
> <mailto:jose.cornado at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Problem worked around. Thanks anyway!
>
>
>     On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:37 AM, José Cornado
>     <jose.cornado at gmail.com <mailto:jose.cornado at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hello!
>
>         I have the following problem with javax.tools.JavaCompiler:
>
>         A background jvm, depending on user input from IDE, generates
>         classes dynamically.
>
>         This can take time, so to avoid the delay I use the flag
>         "-implicit:none". The IDE provides enough data I can infer if
>         everything is in place and stick to parse/build just the
>         target class.  Because I don't write some streams to disk
>         there are a lot of cases where the *.class is in the correct
>         directory but the *.java does not exist.
>
>         Now the problem:
>
>         If the target class imports a type from another
>         package/location the flag works great. If the target class
>         imports a class from the same location the JavaCompiler
>         completely ignores this flag and the fact that the *.class
>         exists and looks for the source file which doesn't exist and
>         fails.
>
>         Question 1: is this the expected behavior of the compiler.
>
>         Question 2: would avoid importing type from the same package
>         change the behavior of the compiler in anyway?
>
>         I am running build 1.7.0_25-b15 on a mac
>
>
>         Thanks a lot in advance!!!
>
>         -- 
>         José Cornado
>
>         --
>
>         home: http://www.efekctive.com
>         blog: http://blogging.efekctive.com
>         ----------------------
>
>         Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we
>         have to keep going back and beginning all over again.
>
>         Andre Gide
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     José Cornado
>
>     --
>
>     home: http://www.efekctive.com
>     blog: http://blogging.efekctive.com
>     ----------------------
>
>     Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have
>     to keep going back and beginning all over again.
>
>     Andre Gide
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> José Cornado
>
> --
>
> home: http://www.efekctive.com
> blog: http://blogging.efekctive.com
> ----------------------
>
> Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to 
> keep going back and beginning all over again.
>
> Andre Gide

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20130814/2c787189/attachment.html