From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3836 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2003 20:01:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3806 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jan 2003 20:01:55 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030129200155.3805.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ebb9@email.byu.edu, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, java-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: aph@gcc.gnu.org Reply-To: aph@gcc.gnu.org, ebb9@email.byu.edu, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, java-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: java/8433: Static initializers must be able to complete normally X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01701.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: Static initializers must be able to complete normally State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback State-Changed-By: aph State-Changed-When: Wed Jan 29 20:01:55 2003 State-Changed-Why: I don't understand how gcj is expected to do this. Determining whether a static initializer will complete normally is equivalent to the halting problem, and is therefore not computable. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8433