This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Patch: FYI: gcj3.1 status update
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Rainer Orth <ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 08 Apr 2002 14:19:37 -0600
- Subject: Re: Patch: FYI: gcj3.1 status update
- References: <87vgbpkdq9.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <yddadt1n13h.fsf@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <87hen88j9l.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <15522.10591.629932.889883@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <873cylmtgy.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <15522.23358.94998.805757@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <15523.5741.745762.853848@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <87bsd1wl3t.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <15531.21599.355771.833799@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> <15533.48639.496928.713137@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
Andrew> Better though to fix System.gc() so that it doesn't return
Andrew> until a grabage collection cycle has really happned. There
Andrew> are deadlock problems with this, as I mentioned before. I
Andrew> guess we could work around that problem with a fairly short
Andrew> timeout.
Could you submit a PR for this, so we can track it in the future? I
agree that these things (System.gc and .runFinalization) should be
synchronous.
I'm not too concerned about these for 3.1. I see the "GC on open()
failure" thing as more a whim of mine than a real requirement.
Tom