Re: [BC] Patch: Cached class map

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > 
 > >Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > > > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > > 
 > > > >2004-10-28  Andrew Haley  <aph@redhat.com>
 > > > >
 > > > >	* gnu/gcj/runtime/PersistentByteMap.java: New file.
 > > > >	* jv_dbtool.java: New file.
 > > > 
 > > > Shouldn't we put jv_dbtool in a package - say, gnu.gcj.tools or gnu.gcj ?
 > >
 > >Well, I was about to rename it anyway, so I'm interested in
 > >suggestions.  What would be better if I did this?
 > >  
 > >
 > I'd say:
 > 
 > - Cleaner top-level libjava directory
 > - Establishes a common place to put other possible future tools

I haven't been able to conclude that a clean top-level libjava
directory was ever a goal, but I see your point.  :-)

The trouble with putting it somewhere lower down the tree is that it
looks like it's part of the Java library, rather than an entirely
separate application.  It seems to me that this is rather confusing,
but I can live with it.

 > - Better conformance with Java coding conventions, which discourage 
 > putting things in the top-level (empty) namespace

I suppose we should follow convention.

I see that sun use com.sun.tools.javac.Main for javac, so this is a
good convention to follow.  I'm happy with gnu.gcj.tools.

(As an aside: shouldn't it be org.gnu.*  ?)

Andrew.