Re: [PATCH] libjava: Add option to disable BC ABI in libgcj.

[David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:
> David Daney wrote:
>> Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>>> +@item --disable-libgcj-bc
>>> +Disable BC ABI compilation of certain parts of libgcj.  By default,
>>> +some portions of libgcj are compiled with @option{-findirect-dispatch}
>>> +@option{-fno-indirect-classes}.  This allows them to be overridden at
>>> +runtime.
>>>
>>> When first reading this, I got a bit confused by two aspects.  
>>> Perhaps this is something to address in a follow-up patch, David?
>>>
>>> One was that "BC API compilation" (including myself ;-) isn't 
>>> something most readers of doc/install.texi would be familiar with.  
>>> How about
>>> expanding this or adding a reference/cross-reference?
>>>
>>> The second one was that I wasn't sure what "This" referred to: the 
>>> configure option, or the previous sentence explaining BC ABI 
>>> compilation.
>>> Perhaps replacing this by ", which" might be more clear?
>>>
>>> +If @option{--disable-libgcj-bc} is specified, libgcj is built without
>>> +these options.  This makes it impossible to override portions of
>>> +libgcj at runtime, but can make it easier to statically link to 
>>> libgcj.
>>>
>>> Why does this read "can make" and not just "makes"?  I'm sure there is
>>> some technical background here which I'm missing. :-)  Perhaps a 
>>> (cross)
>>> reference to more detailed information somewhere else could clarify 
>>> that?
>>>   
>> How about this version instead?  I think it gets rid of some of the
>> ambiguity and explains things a bit better.
>>
>> There really is nothing other than e-mail archives that could be cross
>> referenced to provide deeper information about this option.
>
> See ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/summit/2004/GCJ%20New%20ABI.pdf

While I could certainly reference this paper, I am not sure that 
install.texi is the best place for such a reference.

I was thinking that if someone wanted to know the gory details, they 
could look up -findirect-dispatch.  I was trying to keep the install 
documentation as small as possible while still describing what the new 
option does.

>
>> Tested with make info and make html with no errors.
>>
>> 2008-01-25  David Daney  <ddaney@avtrex.com>
>>
>>     * doc/install.texi (--disable-libgcj-bc):  Reword documentation.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Index: doc/install.texi
>> ===================================================================
>> --- doc/install.texi    (revision 131856)
>> +++ doc/install.texi    (working copy)
>> @@ -1557,12 +1557,13 @@ Disable JVMPI support.
>>  @item --disable-libgcj-bc
>>  Disable BC ABI compilation of certain parts of libgcj.  By default,
>>  some portions of libgcj are compiled with @option{-findirect-dispatch}
>> -@option{-fno-indirect-classes}.  This allows them to be overridden at
>> -runtime.
>> +and @option{-fno-indirect-classes}, allowing them to be overridden at
>> +run-time.
>>  
>>  If @option{--disable-libgcj-bc} is specified, libgcj is built without
>> -these options.  This makes it impossible to override portions of
>> -libgcj at runtime, but can make it easier to statically link to libgcj.
>> +these options.  This allows the compile-time linker to resolve
>> +dependencies when statically linking to libgcj.  However it makes it
>> +impossible to override the effected portions of libgcj at run-time.
>
> Is that *a*ffected rather than *e*ffected?
>
I don't think so, but I have a limited grasp of the English language.  I 
will defer to others on which of 'affected' or 'effected' should be used 
here.

David Daney