This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Announcement: micro-libgcj


On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Andrew Haley wrote:

Joel Dice writes:
> For those who are interested, I've released a lightweight version of
> libgcj which is useful for creating small standalone executables using
> GCJ.  For more information, please see the Sourceforge project site:
>
>    http://ulibgcj.sourceforge.net
>
> Feedback is welcome.

This is very welcome!  Back in the early days of gcj we had
lightweight library, but we lost it as we gradually drifted towards
full compatibility.

It would be nice if we could figure a way to merge the code bases.

I'd be happy to perform this merge if there's a good chance it will be accepted.


I'm guessing that the proper way to do this is to start with the code in libjava/ and add a lot of these:

#ifndef LIGHTWEIGHT_LIBGCJ
  ... // stuff that isn't wanted in the lightweight build
#endif

and a few of these:

#ifdef LIGHTWEIGHT_LIBGCJ
 ... // stuff that is dumbed-down for the lightweight build
#else
 ... // more complicated version for the heavyweight build
#endif

and just not build or link files that aren't needed by the lightweight version.

Would the clutter caused by these extra directives be acceptable?

A more difficult question is how would the Java sources be handled, considering they are not pre-processed? My choice would be to preprocess them, allowing the directives above, instead of maintaining a separate tree. This would of course be complicated by the GNU Classpath merge.

Finally, would it be worth delaying such a merge until gcjx is ready?

- Joel


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]