This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Speaking of runtime options
- From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
- To: Nic Ferrier <nferrier at tapsellferrier dot co dot uk>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:33:12 +1300
- Subject: Re: Speaking of runtime options
- References: <87g04r47np.fsf@tf1.tapsellferrier.co.uk>
Nic Ferrier wrote:
>I know that gcj is focussed mainly on the compilation of java to
>native code... but the interpreter is also useful.
>
>Currently the interpreter doesn't support the same options as Sun's
>interpreter. GCJ can't use getopt because of licencing problems so I
>started writing an option parser that could be used.
>
>I've done most of it and it's fairly simple, but I did it as an
>exercise more than anything and I don't want to continue with it
>unless it's useful to the GCJ team.
>
>
>Would a new gij (or a new option handler for the gcj tool) be useful?
>
Definately! Note that gij could be written in pure Java, unless perhaps
there are command line options which can only be set before the runtime
is initialized.
regards
Bryce.