This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
gcj -c -d ?
- From: Norman Hendrich <hendrich at informatik dot uni-hamburg dot de>
- To: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 10:55:54 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: gcj -c -d ?
- Reply-to: Norman Hendrich <hendrich at informatik dot uni-hamburg dot de>
Three questions about gcj usability:
1) Why does gcj allow "-d <directory>" when compiling to bytecode,
but not when compiling to object files? For quick and dirty
development without hand-tuned makefiles, I really like the Java
(javac/jikes) way of compiling:
gcj -C -d . org/foo/bar/Baz.java
gcj -c -d . org/foo/bar/Baz.class
and:
gcj -c -d . */*/*/*.class
gcj -o baz.exe --main=org.foo.bar.Baz */*/*/*.o
instead of:
gcj -c -o org/foo/bar/Baz.o org/foo/bar/Baz.class
and dozens of separate Makefiles, one per package directory.
2) When trying to compile with -O2 -static, as suggested by Jeff,
gcj was flooding me with "unreachable bytecode" warnings,
which effectively hid the more important messages.
I would prefer if the "unreachable bytecode" warnings were turned
off, unless expicitly enabled (like -Wall).
3) Why does gcj -c Foo.java prints a warning message, when Foo.java
is newer than Foo.class? OK, I know that compiling from source
is still not as robust as compiling from classes...
Still, if I explicitly tell gcj to compile from sources, I think
the warning would be more appropriate, if it were using the
.class file as input instead :-)
- Norman