Re: Patch: RFC: verifier genericization

[Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at gmail dot com>]

Tom Tromey wrote:
> This patch shows one possible way to make the verifier more generic.

My 2p on this subject:

I believe a better option would be for us
to:

1.  Convert the libgcj verifier to be in pure
    C - which can then have a C++ wrapper (throwing
    exceptions, etc.) in libgcj. (Disclaimer: I
    haven't yet studied how much of an effort this
    really might be.) This should be licensed under
    GPL + Exception.

2a. Put this verifier in the "gcc/java" folder if
    the above licensing is not an issue.

    or

2b. Put this verifier in a (say) "libbcverify" folder
    parallel to "boehm-gc", "zlib", etc.

#1 will allow easier integration into both GCJ as
well as any other interested third-party applications.

#2a will hopefully entail the least configury changes.

#2b will likely involve more configury changes, but
would be easier to distribute elsewhere as needed. It
might also involve a bit of haggling with the Steering
Committee (or whoever decides what is allowed in the
top-level folder).

In either case, the verifier would have to be built
once for the host and once for the target. For #2b,
it might be better to have a shared library with the
verifier.

What do you guys think?

Ranjit.

-- 
Ranjit Mathew             Email: rmathew AT gmail DOT com

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