This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Patch: replace mutex with object synchronization
- From: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>, Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>, <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 15:58:32 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: Patch: replace mutex with object synchronization
On 13 Apr 2004, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Bryce> I guess it doesn't matter right now, since libgcj itself isn't
> Bryce> built with the BC-ABI, but eventually, using Java locks here
> Bryce> could potentially lead to circularity problems.
>
> I suspect there will always be a few classes we don't compile with the
> BC ABI. Object, maybe Class and String too. This seems like an area
> we need to experiment with once the patches are in.
Yeah. At one time I successfully compiled most of libgcj with
-fno-assume-compiled. Except java.lang.Class; I don't remember why but it
did not work.
Jeff