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: Question of the status of GCJ

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Mike Purdy <purdymi at binghamtonschools dot org>
Cc: Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:01:38 +0000
Subject: Re: Question of the status of GCJ
References: <499A8751.1474.006D.0@binghamtonschools.org> <1234947958.3633.13.camel@hermans.wildebeest.org> <499BDE0A.1474.006D.0@binghamtonschools.org>

Mike Purdy wrote:

> So, if I understand the summary of this.. although effort has shifted
> to OpenJDK, gcj is still viable and potentially a good performing
> solution if our code is generally 1.5 code.  Further, current gcj
> native-compile functionality will not break in the future, so a project
> built with gcj in its build stream will be ok for a while to come. (?)

I think so, but it all depends on whether people keep it maintained.
The only way you can guarantee future support is either to pay
someone to support it, or do so yourself.

Andrew.

References:
- Question of the status of GCJ
  - From: Mike Purdy
- Re: Question of the status of GCJ
  - From: Mark Wielaard
- Re: Question of the status of GCJ
  - From: Mike Purdy

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