GCC 3.0 Branch

[Mark Mitchell]

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:

>>>>> "Mark" == Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:

    Mark> I have tagged and branched the sources for GCC 3.0.  The tag
    Mark> is `gcc-3_0-branchpoint'; the branch itself is
    Mark> `gcc-3_0-branch'.

    Tom> Hi Mark.

    Tom> I have some questions about how Java relates to the branch.

    Tom> * Will we be enabling Java by default for platforms where it
    Tom> is known to work?  This is very important to us.

    Tom> * Recently we've received some Java patches which enable new
    Tom> ports.

    Tom>   * A patch to enable the bytecode interpreter on PPC * A
    Tom> patch to enable primitive (no threads, no GC) Java support on
    Tom> nearly any platform.

    Tom>   Would these be acceptable for gcc 3.0?

In general, I'm very liberal with respect to Java in GCC 3.0.  There's
not much in the way of a pre-existing Java user base, so the normal
fears about regressions aren't nearly as important.  I think you
should do anything you want in the Java directory, or anywhere else
that only affects Java.

The only caveat is that we must not break builds for people.  

But, I have no problem with turning on Java by default on platforms
where it is "known to work".  Go ahead.

Thanks,

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com