This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH: java: suppress java.lang.Object constructor
>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> writes:
Alexandre> But what if the base class is then modified such that the
Alexandre> constructor is no longer a do-nothing? Wouldn't it be
Alexandre> reasonable for one to expect not to have to recompile the
Alexandre> derived class?
Any change to a base class necessitates rebuilding all the derived
classes. That's because dependencies are handled on a file basis only
-- in practice nobody analyzes the new file to see what has changed.
Maybe the order of methods changed. Maybe a new field was added.
Maybe you mean just in the case where a developer is doing everything
by hand. He would "know" that he doesn't have to rebuild the derived
files. Does this case matter?
Tom