Patch to enable libgcj.dll for MinGW
Andrew Haley
aph@redhat.com
Tue Sep 6 16:45:00 GMT 2005
Bryce McKinlay writes:
> Terry Laurenzo wrote:
>
> >>Could you explain the need for the gjavah changes more? Obviously, we
> >>couldn't apply this patch as-is with that change. Perhaps decompiling
> >>could be disabled conditionally for mingw/cygwin (maybe just by adding a
> >>command-line argument), if it can't be fixed some other way.
> >>
> >>
> >See the thread http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2005-08/msg00064.html . It
> >is my opinion that the patch for gjavah is in the best interests of
> >everyone for all platforms.
Why? It's a simple optimization that works perfectly well on most
platforms. We could have a target-specific diable for this.
Sure, it's not an important optimization, but I fail to see why
removing it is an improvement for all platforms.
> >I will break it out and submit it separately if necessary.
> OK, I'm inclined to agree with you. This feature contradicts binary
> compatibility
I'm not sure why: for BC to work properly we'll need to have BC ways
to get at instance variables, so his will work too.
Andrew.
More information about the Java
mailing list