From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <java-return-26752-listarch-java=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21939 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2010 04:30:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 21922 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Nov 2010 04:30:43 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from c60.cesmail.net (HELO c60.cesmail.net) (216.154.195.49)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 04:30:36 +0000
Received: from unknown (HELO delta2) ([192.168.1.50])  by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2010 00:30:34 -0400
Received: from 89.241.156.255 ([89.241.156.255]) by webmail.spamcop.net	(Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:30:34 -0400
Message-ID: <20101101003034.kch6ozjs2oksssko-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 04:30:00 -0000
From: Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@embecosm.com>
To: Geert Bosch <bosch@adacore.com>
Cc: Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,	java@gcc.gnu.org, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default
References: <AANLkTikPP+=RS4BL_NQFaENvFtvvk9ughpP3kWvWT25A@mail.gmail.com>	<8FA16519-D671-4B52-B6C5-3A06187245F5@adacore.com>
In-Reply-To: <8FA16519-D671-4B52-B6C5-3A06187245F5@adacore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=UTF-8;	DelSp="Yes";	format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4)
Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <java.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Id: <java.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:java-subscribe@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/>
List-Post: <mailto:java@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:java-help@gcc.gnu.org>, <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2

Quoting Geert Bosch <bosch@adacore.com>:

>
> On Oct 31, 2010, at 15:33, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> The argument against disabling java as a default language always was
>> that there should be at least one default language that requires
>> non-call exceptions. I recall testing many patches without trouble if
>> I did experimental builds with just C, C++, and Fortran, only to find
>> lots of java test suite failures in a complete bootstrap+test cycle.
>> So the second point is, IMVHO, not really true.
>
> Feel free to enable Ada. Builds and tests faster than Java,
> and is known to expose many more middle end bugs, including
> ones that require non-call exceptions.

But to get that coverage, testers will need to have gnat installed.
Will that become a requirement for middle-end patch regression testing?