This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Speaking of runtime options

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
Cc: Nic Ferrier <nferrier at tapsellferrier dot co dot uk>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 28 Jan 2002 17:17:04 -0700
Subject: Re: Speaking of runtime options
References: <87g04r47np.fsf@tf1.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <877kq3z2qm.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <877kq3qmw7.fsf@tf1.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <3C55E2DC.8020305@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>
Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com

>>>>> "Bryce" == Bryce McKinlay <bryce@waitaki.otago.ac.nz> writes:

Nic> If the latter I think gij should use that rather than RunMain.

Bryce> ... and do the VM argument processing from
Bryce> _Jv_CreateJavaVM. Yes, I agree.

One subtlety is that we want gij to support --help and --version, but
I think we can't put these into the _Jv_CreateJavaVM parsing.  We'll
have to do the parsing twice, or add a way to handle this.

Tom

References:
- Speaking of runtime options
  - From: Nic Ferrier
- Re: Speaking of runtime options
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: Speaking of runtime options
  - From: Nic Ferrier
- Re: Speaking of runtime options
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]