Re: [BC] Patch: Cached class map

[Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:

> 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.
>  
Yeah, I think putting it in a "tools" package should be enough to 
identify it as not being part of the library, though.

> > - 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.*  ?)
>  
http://www.gnu.org/software/java/packages.html#TOC-why-just-gnu

:)

Bryce