Re: compatibility with jikes ?

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Koch <konqueror at gmx dot de> writes:

Michael> java.net.DatagramSocketImpl.getOption()
Michael> java.net.DatagramSocketImpl.setOption()
Michael> java.net.SocketImpl.getOption()
Michael> java.net.SocketImpl.setOption()

Michael> They came in via a merge with classpath long time ago. GCJ
Michael> dont need them. They are only there to make these classes
Michael> compilable with jikes (in classpath tree).

Michael> Should we really keep them in the libgcj tree for jikes
Michael> compatibility or better remove them because we dont need them
Michael> ?

Actually the comment says they are there to work around a gcj bug.

This may be one of those bugs that only shows up if you compile a lot
of java files with one gcj command.  Though it does look like a
classic instance of the Miranda method problem, so I'm not entirely
sure why we wouldn't need this.

Generally I prefer to keep things merged with Classpath.  That makes
it simpler to know when we need to import a bug fix or whatever.

OTOH, java.net has already diverged quite a bit.  We're already going
to have to spend time re-merging.  So if you want to do this, it is
fine by me.

What I'd really like is a fix for this bug in gcj.

Tom