Re: RFC: micro-libgcj merge proposal

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Bryce" == Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay@redhat.com> writes:

Bryce> As far as the class libraries are concerned, I'm really not sure that
Bryce> the benefits of a single source base justify the maintenance overhead
Bryce> of preprocessing. If we are talking about something along the lines of
Bryce> CLDC vs J2SE, the differences are dramatic enough that attempting to
Bryce> build one of the other though preprocessing would quickly become very
Bryce> messy.

I think there is an empirical question here -- which approach costs
less in which development scenarios.  Not that we know the answer :-)
But it doesn't strike me as a sure thing in either direction.

Bryce> It also means, in the absence of a preprocessing standard for Java,
Bryce> that the classpath source would become incomprehensible to 3rd-party
Bryce> development tools.

Per's solution neatly avoids this.  Though the question of
comprehensibility to developers is still open :-)


Another question I have in this area: what is the viability, or not,
of post-processing instead of pre-processing?

Tom