Re: RFC: micro-libgcj merge proposal

[Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:
> Joel Dice writes:
>
>  > The following is a brief proposal for merging micro-libgcj into the GCC
>  > source tree.  Comments and suggestions are welcome.
>
> First impressions:
>
> I don't think we should do put anything really incompatible into the
> libgcj source tree.  I understand the technical reasons for it, but
> divergence is IMO a Bad Thing.
>   

Would it be possible and/or make sense to make micro-libgcj conform to 
any of the existing J2ME
profiles? How much divergence does micro-libgcj currently have compared 
to, say, the CLDC specification?

If nobody can agree on what exactly should be in micro-libgcj, then I'm 
not sure how broadly useful it really would be. I'm not sure I like the 
idea of a library that doesn't conform to some existing standard.

Perhaps a better goal should be to better modularize the core of libgcj 
itself so that it can support various alternative class library profiles?

Bryce