This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: I can make your gcj-compiled binaries much smaller.
Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
> > You have this problem whenever you link statically, whether you use my
> > technique or not.
> Indeed yes, which is why static linkage doesn't work either.
Fine, "my proposal will work as well as static linkage currently
works, with the advantage of smaller binaries" </pedantic> Honestly,
let's not start arguing about what "works" means. Please.
> What if, for example, the target class is package private?
You can't reflect onto non-public constructs, so this isn't a concern.
> However, I don't think we should get into the situation where libgcj
> contains static class references
You don't have to. The application developer will do this.
But this is all really off-topic... I've been aware of this issue for
a long time... are there any OTHER problems with my proposal?
- a