Announcement: micro-libgcj

[Boehm, Hans]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joel Dice [mailto:dicej@mailsnare.net] 
> Still, there's no reason we can't all have what we want.  I'm 
> happy to add 
> support for Java-compatible synchronization as a build 
> option.  This would 
> be any easy task to perform while merging with the GCC tree.  
> Same goes 
> for anything else that I've "broken" with respect to Java.  
> With the right 
> pre-processor magic, we can all be happy :).
> 
That sounds much better to me.  Thanks.  It seems to me that having a
class that doesn't inherit from Object breaks the standard containers,
and probably introduces other problems.

When you say that hash synchronization can be slow, are you talking
about worst-case times?  On a uniprocessor with cheap locks?  In a
linux-like environment, that shouldn't be true for the average case.
Worst-case execution time is another thing (along with space usage for
small apps and simplicity) the current implementation was not optimized
for.

Hans