Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default

[Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>]

On 11/11/2010 3:20 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>> Currently we build the Java frontend and libjava by default.  At the GCC
>> Summit we raised the question of whether should turn this off, thus only
>> building it when java is explicitly selected at configure time with
>> --enable-languages.  Among the people at the summit, there was general
>> support for this, and nobody was opposed to it.

> I count 33 messages on the topic and it is clear that there is no
> consensus.  I am withdrawing this proposed patch.

I think that's a mistake.

The arguments raised, such as the fact that Java tests non-call
exceptions, are just not persuasive to me.  If we need tests for a
middle-end feature, we can almost always write them in C or C++.

The bottom line is that libjava takes a very long time to build and that
the marginal benefit is out of proportion to the cost.  Building
zillions of Java class files cannot be the best way to test non-call
exceptions.  If we have no tests for non-call exceptions in the C/C++
testsuite, perhaps you (Ian) could write a few in C++?

Ian, I was prepared to approve the patch.  I certainly won't do that if
you now think it's a bad idea, but if you still think it's a good idea,
I think you should go for it.

I think that it should still be the case that if you break Java, and one
of the Java testers catches you, you still have an obligation to fix the
problem.  All we're changing is whether you build Java by default;
nothing else.

Thank you,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713