|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 03:31 AM EDT |
Actually it is not so easy.
The question is: what is "core" and what is "extra" with
regard to the *platform*?
In my opinion, if your aim is to implement a *compatible platform* developers
would be familiar with, could use their prewritten code libraries etc, the
"core" for you is anything widely used and applicable. Regardless of
the name.
You simply can't afford to skip anything like javax.xml.* or a lot of 3rd party
code will be broken and your platform will be deemed incompatible.
On the other hand, you can easily skip things like seemingly "core"
java.awt, since it simply does not apply.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 09:55 AM EDT |
See http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/package.html
"The "javax" prefix indicates that this is a package that was
initially developed as an "extension" (for JDK 1.1), and has migrated
into the "core" runtime for JDK 1.2. As other extensions migrate into
core, they will also retain their "javax" prefix."[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|