Re: [PATCH] libjava: Add option to disable BC ABI in libgcj.

[David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:
> David Daney wrote:
> > Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > > +@item --disable-libgcj-bc
> > > +Disable BC ABI compilation of certain parts of libgcj.  By default,
> > > +some portions of libgcj are compiled with @option{-findirect-dispatch}
> > > +@option{-fno-indirect-classes}.  This allows them to be overridden at
> > > +runtime.
> > >
> > > When first reading this, I got a bit confused by two aspects.  
> > > Perhaps this is something to address in a follow-up patch, David?
> > >
> > > One was that "BC API compilation" (including myself ;-) isn't 
> > > something most readers of doc/install.texi would be familiar with.  
> > > How about
> > > expanding this or adding a reference/cross-reference?
> > >
> > > The second one was that I wasn't sure what "This" referred to: the 
> > > configure option, or the previous sentence explaining BC ABI 
> > > compilation.
> > > Perhaps replacing this by ", which" might be more clear?
> > >
> > > +If @option{--disable-libgcj-bc} is specified, libgcj is built without
> > > +these options.  This makes it impossible to override portions of
> > > +libgcj at runtime, but can make it easier to statically link to 
> > > libgcj.
> > >
> > > Why does this read "can make" and not just "makes"?  I'm sure there is
> > > some technical background here which I'm missing. :-)  Perhaps a 
> > > (cross)
> > > reference to more detailed information somewhere else could clarify 
> > > that?
> > >   
> > How about this version instead?  I think it gets rid of some of the
> > ambiguity and explains things a bit better.
> >
> > There really is nothing other than e-mail archives that could be cross
> > referenced to provide deeper information about this option.
>
> See ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/summit/2004/GCJ%20New%20ABI.pdf

While I could certainly reference this paper, I am not sure that 
install.texi is the best place for such a reference.

I was thinking that if someone wanted to know the gory details, they 
could look up -findirect-dispatch.  I was trying to keep the install 
documentation as small as possible while still describing what the new 
option does.

> > Tested with make info and make html with no errors.
> >
> > 2008-01-25  David Daney  <ddaney@avtrex.com>
> >
> >     * doc/install.texi (--disable-libgcj-bc):  Reword documentation.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Index: doc/install.texi
> > ===================================================================
> > --- doc/install.texi    (revision 131856)
> > +++ doc/install.texi    (working copy)
> > @@ -1557,12 +1557,13 @@ Disable JVMPI support.
> >  @item --disable-libgcj-bc
> >  Disable BC ABI compilation of certain parts of libgcj.  By default,
> >  some portions of libgcj are compiled with @option{-findirect-dispatch}
> > -@option{-fno-indirect-classes}.  This allows them to be overridden at
> > -runtime.
> > +and @option{-fno-indirect-classes}, allowing them to be overridden at
> > +run-time.
> >  
> >  If @option{--disable-libgcj-bc} is specified, libgcj is built without
> > -these options.  This makes it impossible to override portions of
> > -libgcj at runtime, but can make it easier to statically link to libgcj.
> > +these options.  This allows the compile-time linker to resolve
> > +dependencies when statically linking to libgcj.  However it makes it
> > +impossible to override the effected portions of libgcj at run-time.
>
> Is that *a*ffected rather than *e*ffected?
I don't think so, but I have a limited grasp of the English language.  I 
will defer to others on which of 'affected' or 'effected' should be used 
here.

David Daney