This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: ia64 eh, part 20a [java]
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: ia64 eh, part 20a [java]
- From: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
- Date: 02 Apr 2001 16:40:23 -0700
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <20010328013957.A14777@redhat.com><m2d7av55pk.fsf@kelso.bothner.com> <20010402163148.C24464@redhat.com>
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
> I'm a bit confused. Does it seem like I might have broken bytecode
> compilation with things as they stand?
Well, that's what I'm worrying about - it looks like you might have.
But I assume you've run the testsuite?
> Or is this a general concern about breaking things if we were to
> generate object and bytecode simultaneously?
Well, it's a opinion that I would prefer to minimize places where
we generate different tree nodes depending on -femit-class-files,
so it would be nice to keep this in mind when evaluating different
implementations.
--
--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/