eliminate gcjh?
sf
sf@b-i-t.de
Tue Mar 9 10:30:00 GMT 2004
Christian Stuellenberg wrote:
>>>>>>"AM" == Adam Megacz <adam@megacz.com> writes:
>
>
> AM> Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
> >> For instance, 1.5 has covariant methods,
>
> AM> Is it covariant at the bytecode level, or just at the language
> AM> level? If it's the former, doesn't this break compatability?
>
> If I remind right, all this is "only" at language level, since they
> did not want to change the VM (to stay compatible e.g.). 1.5 does
> only translation of some syntactic sugar to other valid java code on
> the fly I think... some real functional featueres (while still
> staying compatible to most VM's back to 1.3/2) you can accomplish
> using http://nice.sf.net/.
Covariance has always existed at bytecode level. See also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9861 .
Regards
Stephan
More information about the Java
mailing list