From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 96824 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2015 16:47:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 96806 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2015 16:47:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:47:04 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CF50A2C0A; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:47:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-113-104.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.104]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t7CGl2P9015029; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:47:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH, libjava/classpath]: Fix overriding recipe for target 'gjdoc' build warning To: Ian Lance Taylor , Tom Tromey References: <55CA44C8.7000209@redhat.com> <87mvxxdxys.fsf@tromey.com> <55CB5BB7.4090703@redhat.com> <871tf81nrk.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: Uros Bizjak , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , GCJ-patches , Andrew Haley From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <55CB7885.6090900@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:47:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-q3/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 On 08/12/2015 10:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: >> Jeff> In the past this has stalled on issues like how will asynch-exceptions >> Jeff> be tested and the like. >> >> It seems to me that either there is some other language which needs this >> -- in which case that language ought to have testing for the feature -- >> or the feature is only used by gcj, in which case it doesn't matter. >> >> Of course is!=ought; but relying on gcj and libjava to provide this >> small amount of testing seems like a bad cost/benefit tradeoff. > > Go does use asynchronous exceptions, and has test cases that rely on > them working. If you're comfortable with Go at this point and we have mechanisms in place to ensure Go only gets built on platforms that support Go, then I think we should go forward with replacing GCJ with Go. Jeff