Re: Trying to merge java.lang.Float, java.lang.Double withClasspath -- help wanted

[Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>]

Hi,

On Sun, 2003-09-21 at 23:53, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 08:35 Pacific/Auckland, Nathanael Nerode 
> wrote:
> 
> > This was an attempt to merge java.lang.Float and java.lang.Double with
> > Classpath.
> [...]
> I do not agree with this. The existing java.lang.Number classes in 
> libgcj are a clean design that demonstrates effective use of CNI. 
> Because they consist largely of native code anyway, merging adds little 
> value at the cost of an extra layer of indirection and additional 
> unnecessary classes.

This new design is a clear demonstration how to use the GNU Classpath VM
interface which demonstrates an effective way of giving different VMs
the possibility to implement VM specific parts in different ways (e.g.
JNI, CNI, Java, ...). Since the added classes are final and package
private they should be easy be optimized away by the VM/Compiler.

I really like to see Classpath and libgcj merge more code and this
change was done especially to facilitate that. Having two similar, but
slightly different code bases is a maintenance burden that we want to
eliminate as much as possible.

Cheers,

Mark

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part