From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14140 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2013 18:06:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 14128 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2013 18:06:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_GC 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; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 18:06:04 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r08I64MW011089 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 13:06:04 -0500 Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn-113-113.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.113]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r08I63XF003637; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 13:06:03 -0500 Message-ID: <50EC600A.6060808@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 18:06:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "java@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: About gcj present and future References: <50EBEC84.3030509@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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: 2013-01/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 On 01/08/2013 05:44 PM, Ernesto wrote: >> Well, yes. Good question. I'd love to restart active development of >> GCJ, but OpenJDK is free software and is way ahead in terms of >> features. GCJ has some advantages, but so far these haven't been enough >> to persuade people to work on it. If we don't do something soon it >> may be too late. > > Could you please elaborate more on "way ahead in terms of features"? > Which features, for example? The Classpath library is somewhere between 1.5 and 1.6. > Must we rely on the Java Class Libraries? Providing a nice set of > classes (an alternative framework) would be a feasible way to turn gcj > into a new life? (another UI framework, implementations on top of > existing native libre/open source, etc) As I told you in my first > email, I am new on gcj so maybe the things I'm writing on are unreal, > unfeasible or completely not applicable. Well, it's a huge job. A better idea IMO would be to fix gcj to use the OpenJDK class library, which would take maybe half a programmer- year for someone with the right experience. Andrew.