Re: Implementation Q

[Colin McCormack <colin at field dot medicine dot adelaide dot edu dot au>]

> Anyway, yes, not supporting rtti makes it hard to link gcj code to
> existing C++ libraries which rely on rtti.  Fixing gcj is the best
> approach.  If you need it in a timely way, as always, you'll probably
> have to write it yourself...

Yep.  I suspect that a partial solution would be easy enough, ie lie :)

One could, I suppose, make typeinfo for a Java class be the same as that for 
void, or create some other opaque thing - JavaClass or something.

How does that strike you, as an initial approximation?

Colin.