Re: bug 18212 closed too early (by me) ?

[Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:39:34 +0100, Bojan Antonovic <bojan@antonovic.com> wrote:
>  Ranjit Mathew wrote:
>  
>  
>  Can you reproduce it with only the files of SMOOD.jar? See in PR 18212. No,
> I don't get an ICE with just SMOOD.jar. Witness: ---------------------------
> 8< --------------------------- try, but please do:
>  
>  gcj -o smood.exe --main=smood.Main smood/Main.class smood/*/*.class
> smood/*/*/*.class smood/*/*/*/*.class

I tried this too with mainline and it still works. :-/


> the output file is specified (without it works) If you can produce this with
> the files of SMOOD.jar only, then there's (maybe) no bug when compiling with
> jars. From your compilation result with the actual version in the CVS we can
> decide what further to do (bug resolved, stripping the code further, and so
> on).

I would just say that at least on Linux with current
mainline I'm not able to get any compiler errors with 
SMOOD.jar (or the expanded classes).

That does not mean that there aren't any problems
for GCJ while compiling from JARs. On the contrary.
The many PRs in Bugzilla bear witness to this.

All I will say is that with the new verifier enabled,
GCJ does much better with JARs even in the
non-BC-ABI case.

Thanks,
Ranjit.

-- 
Ranjit Mathew      Email: rmathew AT gmail DOT com

Bangalore, INDIA.    Web: http://ranjitmathew.hostingzero.com/