Re: gcj and jikes

[Joerg Brunsmann <joerg_brunsmann at yahoo dot de>]

 --- Per Bothner wrote:

> That does not follow.  Code quality may be high, but it does not follow
> that code written to do one task well will have a good structure for
> doing soem other task well.  And it also doesn't follow that someone
> actually *will* do the task.

And it doesn't follow that it's more likely that someone will do the task
(adding generic support to a front end) if gcj is using the old yacc 
based front end.

> Still, if someone really wants to do the work of using Jikes, by all
> means do so.  However, my feeling is that this is not a good time
> for such a project.

There are two different tasks: a) adding generic support to a front end, 
b) integrate jikes front end into gcj. Both tasks could be done independently
in parallel. You think the time is bad because the work done for tasks a) and 
b) have to be merged after finishing and this merging could be avoided if a) 
was done before b). Do other people have opinions concerning this? Anyone with 
enough time, skill, motivation and energy who is willing to do these tasks?
To set the ball rolling let's try to answer if the licenses are compatible or 
can be made compatible. If not, there's no need to discuss this topic anymore.

Jörg

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Bis zu 100 MB Speicher bei http://premiummail.yahoo.de