gcj and jikes

[Joerg Brunsmann]

 --- Per Bothner wrote:

> Well, I have reservations.  I don't think this is the time to spend
> a lot of effort on replacing the front-end. unless we have a plan for
> what to do about JDK 1.5 changes.  It's almost JavaOne-time, and while
> I don't think it very likely we'll see a 1.5 preview, at least a lot
> more information will be announced and previewed.

Your reservation depends on whether or not generics (whose jsr is still not 
finished) will be part of jdk 1.5. I don't follow this argumentation. Switching 
to the jikes front end is not a question of feature quality, it's a question of 
code quality. Better code quality means easier understanding and maintainance. 
Easier understanding means more potential developers. More developers and better 
code quality means that it's easier to add generics support.

> Now if we think think Jikes will probably be a better starting
> point for implementing generics than any other Free alternative,
> then that is an argument in favor of Jikes.

+1

> And I'm certainly not opposed to informally feeling out IBM and/or
> RMS on the licensing issues.  Perhaps someone could convince IBM
> to dual-license Jikes?  Note that we would also probably need
> an assignment.  Though if we ask people to spend a lot of effort
> on re-licensing Jikes, then we really don't want to say "thanks,
> but we changed our mind".

What is your reaction if Sun announce generic support for jdk 1.5 and
after months or years of waiting Sun says "thanks, but we changed
our mind. We´ll support generics in jdk 1.6". Is that the time you'll 
support changing to jikes? BTW: Two years ago Sun announced support for 
generics for jdk 1.4. See, you try to stop open source innovation because 
of potential stupid marketing announcements of a company famous for its 
closed source practices. 

Jörg

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Bis zu 100 MB Speicher bei http://premiummail.yahoo.de