Re: [abc] soot doesn't build against recent polyglot

I did try rolling back the Polyglot file directly causing the problem, but
that depends on changes to another file and I didn't explore further.
Given that we hope to make changes to abc for 1.5 that will depend on also
doing stuff in soot, I don't see a huge amount of benefit in having just
one release that is based on a released soot, unless we want to make a
deliberate decision now to make abc and soot releases in sync.

My view would be different if we'd heard complaints from users about
having to use odd snapshots of soot that we make, but we haven't. Perhaps
we should ask them if they care?

Ganesh

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Oege de Moor wrote:

>
> We requested a very large number of bug fixes in polyglot, some
> of which the polyglot team fixed in the meantime. It seemed
> appropriate to take advantage of the fixes as they came out,
> which is the reason we deviated from using the official polyglot
> release.
>
> It is not possible to reverse this decision now; there are far
> too many changes in Polyglot that are reflected in the abc
> code base. It would be a lot of work to roll these back - and
> we would have a lot of old bugs reappearing.
>
> I am very surprised this only comes up now, as we have been
> using a cvs polyglot (and regularly updating to it) since
> late June.
>
> As the current problem seems very localised, we could just
> fix it in our own copy of Polyglot, so that at least abc uses
> the released Soot?
>
> If I understand the Polyglot people right, they're now planning
> a very big rewrite (using jx), so it seems unlikely there
> will be a release from them we can use soon.
>
> -Oege
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
>
> > I'm not proposing we make Soot not work with Polyglot 1.3. The fix I
> > proposed in another email should make Soot continue to work with Polyglot
> > 1.3, as well as with the version abc requires.
> >
> > I don't know precisely what abc would depend on without trying it, but
> > since Polyglot 1.3 was released in July, I expect there are quite a lot of
> > changes now. For quite some time we were very keen on getting bug fixes
> > for Polyglot as quickly as possible, hence the rush to keep up.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ganesh
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Jennifer LHOTAK wrote:
> >
> > > I just don't understand why abc needs the latest polyglot instead of the
> > > released version. Can someone explain why, what I mean is why isn't abc
> > > able
> > > to depend on the released version?
> > >
> > > I am very concerned about having Soot
> > > depend on an un-released polyglot for next terms 621 class at mcgill. I am
> > > in no way convinced that the students who will be taking the course will
> > > be able to keep up with tracking latest releases from cvs, or that they
> > > will be able to indicate to me or Ondrej which version they're using in
> > > the event of
> > > any problems they might have.
> > >
> > > Jennifer
> > >
> > > On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Ondrej Lhotak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, is this something that can reasonably be fixed in Soot? I don't
> > > > > > know if you try to track latest polyglot CVS or the latest release,
> > > > > > although I think in this case it can be fixed in a way that would be
> > > > > > compatible with either.
> > > > >
> > > > > You suggest that for the short term, it may be possible to devise a Soot
> > > > > that would work with both the released and the CVS Polyglot. That would
> > > > > postpone the problem for the moment, and I would have no problem with
> > > > > such a change. But it's only a stop-gap measure until Polyglot comes up
> > > > > with a change that does not make such a thing possible.
> > > >
> > > > I think the best answer is that we make the change to Soot to fix the
> > > > current problem, assuming that I am right about it being possible, and
> > > > then stop being so aggressive about tracking Polyglot CVS with abc.
> > > > Historically the Polyglot people were producing bug fixes we needed a lot,
> > > > which is why we got into that mindset, but I don't think it's necessary
> > > > any more.
> > > >
> > > > If that fails, then your other suggestion is probably best:
> > > >
> > > > > Yet another alternative, if abc really needs a bleeding-edge Polyglot,
> > > > > would be to maintain an abc-specific branch of Soot. Subversion makes
> > > > > maintaining such branches quite feasible. Is this additional maintenance
> > > > > work a worthwhile price to pay for insisting on bleeding-edge software?
> > > >
> > > > > Since all of this is closely related to the frequency of Polyglot
> > > > > releases, it may make sense to ask the Polyglot gang about their
> > > > > expected release frequency.
> > > >
> > > > It might be worth asking them, but since they are an academic project with
> > > > limited resources like both abc and soot, I think relying on them would be
> > > > dangerous. For abc, I think the policy of producing abc-specific soot and
> > > > polyglot source snapshots is a good solution which means we can release
> > > > when we want to. I had hoped to make version 1.0.1 of abc depend on the
> > > > actual 2.2.0 release of soot for once, but that obviously won't be
> > > > possible now.
> > > >
> > > > I'll make the change to Soot and test it against both Polyglot 1.3 and the
> > > > abc version before checking in, unless you'd rather do it.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Ganesh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Received on Thu Dec 23 13:26:18 2004