From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27082 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2010 17:50:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 27064 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Nov 2010 17:50:23 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_IB,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 17:50:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oA1HoGDY001687 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:50:16 -0400 Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn-113-40.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.40]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oA1HoE9B004910; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:50:14 -0400 Message-ID: <4CCEFDD5.2000106@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 17:50:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Steven Bosscher , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, java@gcc.gnu.org, Ian Lance Taylor Subject: Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On 11/01/2010 05:50 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Steven" == Steven Bosscher writes: > > Steven> The argument against disabling java as a default language always was > Steven> that there should be at least one default language that requires > Steven> non-call exceptions. I recall testing many patches without trouble if > Steven> I did experimental builds with just C, C++, and Fortran, only to find > Steven> lots of java test suite failures in a complete bootstrap+test cycle. > Steven> So the second point is, IMVHO, not really true. > > Is it possible to convert all failures of this form into a C++ test case > with -fnon-call-exceptions? If so then at least there is a way to add > regression tests. In practice, no. We don't know what the C++ equivalent is until we've seen the Java (or Ada) test failure. In the Rumsfeld epistemology it's an unknown uknown, something that we don't know we don't know. > Steven> Is it possible to build and test java without all of libjava? > > As far as I'm aware, not at present. I think even the minimal possible > subset of libjava is pretty big, on the order of hundreds of classes, > IIRC. And the failures I've seen have been in some of the crazy cases, not just simple Java code, where things get complicated. Andrew.