making static linkage useful (oh the horror!)

[Adam Megacz]

Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
> I am in favour of a static linkage mechanism that is not broken.

This is selective, creative redefinition of the word "broken".

The -fno-bounds-check option "breaks" gcj by deviating from the JLS,
yet we still allow it.  I want static compilation to have the same
status and be treated the same way as -fno-bounds-check.

Why is -fno-bounds-check okay, but not-fully-JLS-compliant static
linkage isn't?

  - a