Re: Java front-end and library patches.

[Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Zopolis0 via Gcc-patches wrote:

> > * Each patch should have its own explanation of what it is doing and why,
> > in the message body (not in an attachment).  Just the commit summary line
> > and ChangeLog entries aren't enough, we need the actual substantive commit
> > message explaining the patch.
> 
> The thing is, most of the patches do not need an explanation. Patches
> 1-13 are just re-adding code,

Then state that in the message body (with a reference to the commit that 
removed the code).

Just because code was removed in a given form doesn't mean it should be 
added back in that form.  For example, patch 13, "Re-add 
flag_evaluation_order, reorder_operands_p, and add reorder bool argument 
to tree_swap_operands_p", seems suspicious.  That sort of global state 
affecting IR semantics is best avoided; rather, the Java gimplification 
support should deal with ensuring the correct ordering for operations in 
the GIMPLE generated.  Note that C++ flag_strong_eval_order (for C++17 
evaluation order requirements) is specific to the front end; it doesn't 
require anything in expr.cc or fold-const.cc or other language-independent 
files.  So you should do something similar for Java rather than adding 
back global language-independent state for this.

Patches 1 and 2 don't seem to have reached the mailing list.

> 20-43 and 47 are just applying treewide
> changes that Java missed out on,

So say for each one exactly which commit it's applying the changes for.

> > How has the series been validated?
> 
> I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this.

What target triplets did you run the GCC testsuite on (before and after 
the changes, with no regressions), with what results for the Java-specific 
tests?

> I plan to
> replace Classpath with the OpenJDK, and double down on the machine
> code aspect of GCJ, dropping bytecode and interpreted support.

This sort of thing is key information to include in the summary message 
for any future versions of the patch series.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com