Re: PR java/19285: Interfaces not initialized by static field access

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Tom Tromey writes:
 > >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
 > 
 > Andrew> The idea is that rather than calling _Jv_InitClass for every static
 > Andrew> field we call _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry instead.  We also cache these
 > Andrew> locally so that _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry is only called once.
 > 
 > I think if we add a new function to the exported interface, then we
 > must rev the BC ABI version that we claim to be generating.  The
 > reason for this is that the gcj with this patch will generate code
 > which won't work with an earlier libgcj.  So, I think we must increase
 > the revision.
 > 
 > (I suppose the counter argument is that such objects will simply fail
 > to link.. ?)

The counter argument is that, of necessity, the ABI of gcc HEAD is
experimental; to bump the ABI # on every minor change is unnecessary.
In the case of a released gcc it's a different story.

Andrew.