Re: Question of the status of GCJ

Mike Purdy wrote:

> So, if I understand the summary of this.. although effort has shifted
> to OpenJDK, gcj is still viable and potentially a good performing
> solution if our code is generally 1.5 code.  Further, current gcj
> native-compile functionality will not break in the future, so a project
> built with gcj in its build stream will be ok for a while to come. (?)

I think so, but it all depends on whether people keep it maintained.
The only way you can guarantee future support is either to pay
someone to support it, or do so yourself.

Andrew.