GCJ's URLClassloader and 'core' protocol

[Sal]

Tom Tromey wrote:

> Mohan> That approach won't currently work on Windows.
> 
> IMO we really need someone to fix things so we can build a .dll on
> Windows.  

I would be interested in helping with this... though I am afraid that my 
gcc/gcj knowledge is a bit lacking.  If you could point me to some 
resources (code, docs) I will look into it and see what I can do.  Any 
tips on what parts need hacking specifically would help me out tremendously.

(I have several years c/c++/asm/java experience but little to do with 
compiler architecture.)

 > For the GC parts, this may also imply tightening CNI a bit
> so that roots must be explicitly registered (or whatever, see the many
> discussions on this topic).  There's just no way we're going to make
> static linking work reliably, it is too far from the java model, IMO.

Does the new ABI give any hope for custom classloaders and statically 
linked objects? Or is it just a dead horse now?  I wonder how hard it 
would be to tie objects to their classloaders at runtime instead of 
link-time...

Thanks for the help/info,

- Sal