Re: BC ABI (was "Re: [fedora-java] Re: Java OpenGL on FC4")

["John M. Gabriele" <john_sips_tea at yahoo dot com>]

--- Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay@redhat.com> wrote:

Thanks for the reply Bryce. I used much of it to update the
beginning of:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/How%20to%20BC%20compile%20with%20GCJ

It sounds like, to be able to mix interpreted and natively
compiled code at runtime, you need to have compiled your .jars
with the -findirect-dispatch option, right?

If so, why isn't -findirect-dispatch simply the default
compilation mode?

> [snip]
> 
> On the other 
> hand, if you compile an application using the old style "C++ ABI", it 
> will break as soon as any changes to the public APIs of dependent class 
> libraries are made.

Right -- since the Java runtime should be smart enough to use
the lib as long as the signatures of the methods _it wants to
use_ match up, correct?

What does it mean to compile code with the "old style 'C++ ABI'"?
(Is that referred to as the "standard ABI"?) Does that just simply
mean to *not* use the -findirect-dispatch option?

Thanks,
---John



		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs