public inbox for java@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Java > 1.5
@ 2014-08-15 17:54 Ruben De Smet
  2014-08-16  8:13 ` Andrew Haley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ruben De Smet @ 2014-08-15 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: java

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 888 bytes --]

Dear java@gcc.gnu.org list,

I've gotten to compile some things with GCJ (hooray!) which don't run
fine (ooooh). If I don't come to run it on my own, I'll certainly file a
bug report or contact this list.

I would like to avoid having to distribute a Java runtime to users, but
my teammate is writing code in Java 1.7. I read GCJ only understands 1.5.

Is there any development going on for Java 1.7? Would it be a lot of
work to implement some Java 1.7 features? I would take it on me if needed.

There were two things I noticed with my teammates code that were using
1.7 features. @Override on interfaces and multi exception catch (like
catch (IOException | OtherException e) ).

I'd love to implement these.

Ruben

-- 
I prefer encrypted email. My key's signature ends in 1213DC10 and here's
a tutorial: http://lifehacker.com/180878/how-to-encrypt-your-email


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-15 17:54 Java > 1.5 Ruben De Smet
@ 2014-08-16  8:13 ` Andrew Haley
  2014-08-16  9:44   ` Ruben De Smet
  2014-08-16 10:33   ` Brian Jones
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Haley @ 2014-08-16  8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ruben De Smet, java

On 15/08/14 18:54, Ruben De Smet wrote:
> Dear java@gcc.gnu.org list,
> 
> I've gotten to compile some things with GCJ (hooray!) which don't run
> fine (ooooh). If I don't come to run it on my own, I'll certainly file a
> bug report or contact this list.
> 
> I would like to avoid having to distribute a Java runtime to users, but
> my teammate is writing code in Java 1.7. I read GCJ only understands 1.5.
> 
> Is there any development going on for Java 1.7? Would it be a lot of
> work to implement some Java 1.7 features? I would take it on me if needed.

Right now there's not much prospect of that.  The problem is the class
libraries, which would require a lot of work. The best prospect is to
convert libgcj to use the libraries from OpenJDK, which would work,
but again the conversion would take maybe 6 months for someone who
knows gcj very well, along with some compiler changes.  It could be
done, but there needs to be a compelling reason.

> There were two things I noticed with my teammates code that were using
> 1.7 features. @Override on interfaces and multi exception catch (like
> catch (IOException | OtherException e) ).

I'm sure it's possible.

Andrew.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-16  8:13 ` Andrew Haley
@ 2014-08-16  9:44   ` Ruben De Smet
  2014-08-16 22:59     ` Andrew Haley
  2014-08-16 10:33   ` Brian Jones
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ruben De Smet @ 2014-08-16  9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Haley, java

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1657 bytes --]

On 08/16/2014 10:13 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 15/08/14 18:54, Ruben De Smet wrote:
>> Dear java@gcc.gnu.org list,
>>
>> I've gotten to compile some things with GCJ (hooray!) which don't run
>> fine (ooooh). If I don't come to run it on my own, I'll certainly file a
>> bug report or contact this list.
>>
>> I would like to avoid having to distribute a Java runtime to users, but
>> my teammate is writing code in Java 1.7. I read GCJ only understands 1.5.
>>
>> Is there any development going on for Java 1.7? Would it be a lot of
>> work to implement some Java 1.7 features? I would take it on me if needed.
> 
> Right now there's not much prospect of that.  The problem is the class
> libraries, which would require a lot of work. The best prospect is to
> convert libgcj to use the libraries from OpenJDK, which would work,
> but again the conversion would take maybe 6 months for someone who
> knows gcj very well, along with some compiler changes.  It could be
> done, but there needs to be a compelling reason.

Is there any reason gcj isn't yet using OpenJDK libraries, or is it just
that you didn't think of that yet?

I guess you'll have to implement all the new 1.6 and 1.7 Java features
to get the OpenJDK libraries to work?

> 
>> There were two things I noticed with my teammates code that were using
>> 1.7 features. @Override on interfaces and multi exception catch (like
>> catch (IOException | OtherException e) ).
> 
> I'm sure it's possible.

What would it take me to implement them? Should I CC a devel-mailinglist
right here?

Thank you for your time and answering my questions :)

Ruben



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-16  8:13 ` Andrew Haley
  2014-08-16  9:44   ` Ruben De Smet
@ 2014-08-16 10:33   ` Brian Jones
  2014-08-16 10:37     ` Ruben De Smet
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Brian Jones @ 2014-08-16 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Haley; +Cc: Ruben De Smet, java

Is gcj going to be archived and removed from gcc?  No one works on it right?

> On Aug 16, 2014, at 4:14 AM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/08/14 18:54, Ruben De Smet wrote:
>> Dear java@gcc.gnu.org list,
>>
>> I've gotten to compile some things with GCJ (hooray!) which don't run
>> fine (ooooh). If I don't come to run it on my own, I'll certainly file a
>> bug report or contact this list.
>>
>> I would like to avoid having to distribute a Java runtime to users, but
>> my teammate is writing code in Java 1.7. I read GCJ only understands 1.5.
>>
>> Is there any development going on for Java 1.7? Would it be a lot of
>> work to implement some Java 1.7 features? I would take it on me if needed.
>
> Right now there's not much prospect of that.  The problem is the class
> libraries, which would require a lot of work. The best prospect is to
> convert libgcj to use the libraries from OpenJDK, which would work,
> but again the conversion would take maybe 6 months for someone who
> knows gcj very well, along with some compiler changes.  It could be
> done, but there needs to be a compelling reason.
>
>> There were two things I noticed with my teammates code that were using
>> 1.7 features. @Override on interfaces and multi exception catch (like
>> catch (IOException | OtherException e) ).
>
> I'm sure it's possible.
>
> Andrew.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-16 10:33   ` Brian Jones
@ 2014-08-16 10:37     ` Ruben De Smet
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ruben De Smet @ 2014-08-16 10:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Brian Jones, Andrew Haley; +Cc: java

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 395 bytes --]

On 08/16/2014 12:33 PM, Brian Jones wrote:
> Is gcj going to be archived and removed from gcc?  No one works on it right?

I'd love to see every Java class sometime being native-compiled.
Especially on windows (don't shoot :O) it's useful, because they don't
have package managers and they have to install and keep JRE up to date
themselves. (That's what I heard from Windows users...)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-16  9:44   ` Ruben De Smet
@ 2014-08-16 22:59     ` Andrew Haley
  2014-08-17  8:55       ` Ruben De Smet
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Haley @ 2014-08-16 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ruben De Smet, java

On 16/08/14 10:43, Ruben De Smet wrote:
> On 08/16/2014 10:13 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 15/08/14 18:54, Ruben De Smet wrote:
>>> Dear java@gcc.gnu.org list,
>>>
>>> I've gotten to compile some things with GCJ (hooray!) which don't run
>>> fine (ooooh). If I don't come to run it on my own, I'll certainly file a
>>> bug report or contact this list.
>>>
>>> I would like to avoid having to distribute a Java runtime to users, but
>>> my teammate is writing code in Java 1.7. I read GCJ only understands 1.5.
>>>
>>> Is there any development going on for Java 1.7? Would it be a lot of
>>> work to implement some Java 1.7 features? I would take it on me if needed.
>>
>> Right now there's not much prospect of that.  The problem is the class
>> libraries, which would require a lot of work. The best prospect is to
>> convert libgcj to use the libraries from OpenJDK, which would work,
>> but again the conversion would take maybe 6 months for someone who
>> knows gcj very well, along with some compiler changes.  It could be
>> done, but there needs to be a compelling reason.
> 
> Is there any reason gcj isn't yet using OpenJDK libraries, or is it just
> that you didn't think of that yet?

It's a lot of work.  libgcj has its own interface to gcj, and we'd need
to convert it to the interface the openJDK libraries use.

> I guess you'll have to implement all the new 1.6 and 1.7 Java features
> to get the OpenJDK libraries to work?

Yes, but that's less of an issue.

>>> There were two things I noticed with my teammates code that were using
>>> 1.7 features. @Override on interfaces and multi exception catch (like
>>> catch (IOException | OtherException e) ).
>>
>> I'm sure it's possible.
> 
> What would it take me to implement them? Should I CC a devel-mailinglist
> right here?

Sure.  But I don't quite understand what you want me to tell you.  You'd
need to understand the problem and figure out how to fix it.

Andrew.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-16 22:59     ` Andrew Haley
@ 2014-08-17  8:55       ` Ruben De Smet
  2014-08-17 16:00         ` Andrew Haley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ruben De Smet @ 2014-08-17  8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Haley, java, Brian Jones

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1372 bytes --]

On 08/17/2014 12:59 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> It's a lot of work.  libgcj has its own interface to gcj, and we'd need
> to convert it to the interface the openJDK libraries use.

That indeed sounds like a lot of work. Isn't it easier to 'compile' the
OpenJDK Java classes for the libgcj interface, when gcj has been ported
for java 1.7, or is that impossible?

>
>> I guess you'll have to implement all the new 1.6 and 1.7 Java features
>> to get the OpenJDK libraries to work?
> Yes, but that's less of an issue.

So, if implementing those new features could be done, I guess I've to
start looking at the contribution guidelines.

> 
> Sure.  But I don't quite understand what you want me to tell you.  You'd
> need to understand the problem and figure out how to fix it.

I'd like to be able to deploy my application to my users without having
to distribute a JRE with it (that is, for windows users).
Are there any resources where I can start reading on what interfaces are
to be converted to the OpenJDK interface? I could take some time in
October or November trying to convert this.

Another topic: Brian Jones asked if gcj was dying:
> Is gcj going to be archived and removed from gcc?  No one works on it
> right?

In the git history I can't see a lot of history. Is gcj dying indeed?

Thank you for your valuable time!

Ruben


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: Java > 1.5
  2014-08-17  8:55       ` Ruben De Smet
@ 2014-08-17 16:00         ` Andrew Haley
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Haley @ 2014-08-17 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ruben De Smet, java, Brian Jones

On 17/08/14 09:55, Ruben De Smet wrote:
> On 08/17/2014 12:59 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> It's a lot of work.  libgcj has its own interface to gcj, and we'd need to convert it to the interface the openJDK libraries use.
> 
> That indeed sounds like a lot of work. Isn't it easier to 'compile' the OpenJDK Java classes for the libgcj interface, when gcj has been ported for java 1.7, or is that impossible?

No, you'd have to rewrite the part of the core class library that
communicates with the VM.  I don't think it would be practical.

>>> I guess you'll have to implement all the new 1.6 and 1.7 Java features to get the OpenJDK libraries to work?
>> Yes, but that's less of an issue.
> 
> So, if implementing those new features could be done, I guess I've to start looking at the contribution guidelines.

Sure.  How much do you know about GCC internals?

>> Sure.  But I don't quite understand what you want me to tell you.  You'd need to understand the problem and figure out how to fix it.
> 
> I'd like to be able to deploy my application to my users without having to distribute a JRE with it (that is, for windows users).

You always have to have a JRE.  Maybe it's in a shared library, like
libgcj.  I guess I don't know why you want to do this.

> Are there any resources where I can start reading on what interfaces are to be converted to the OpenJDK interface? I could take some time in October or November trying to convert this.

Let's get real.  I could do move GCJ to use the OpenJDK libraries in
maybe six months to a year.  I am better qualified than almost anyone
else to do it.  I'm not sure there is anything much someone can do in
two months, unless it's simply adding a few classes or bringing some
classes up to date.

> Another topic: Brian Jones asked if gcj was dying:
>> Is gcj going to be archived and removed from gcc?  No one works on it right?
> 
> In the git history I can't see a lot of history. Is gcj dying indeed?

GCJ hasn't been worked on for some time.  Will anyone work on it again?
I don't know.  It's very out of date.

Andrew.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-08-17 16:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-08-15 17:54 Java > 1.5 Ruben De Smet
2014-08-16  8:13 ` Andrew Haley
2014-08-16  9:44   ` Ruben De Smet
2014-08-16 22:59     ` Andrew Haley
2014-08-17  8:55       ` Ruben De Smet
2014-08-17 16:00         ` Andrew Haley
2014-08-16 10:33   ` Brian Jones
2014-08-16 10:37     ` Ruben De Smet

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).