Re: Trouble building gcj 4.8.1
Bryce McKinlay <[email protected]> Tue, 2 Jul 2013 15:53:08 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALUNu-qbpH8omT=1uq9f0QaGUr-jO4f=bOkZ3PKbErUA9yDHKw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Andrew Haley <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/25/2013 03:15 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: >>> I'm trying to find out what you want to do to java.lang.String. Tell me >>> that, and we'll take it from there. >> >> At the moment, supporting the methods that take java.nio.Charset. I'm >> going to try and just hack it up with something like this: >> >> public String(byte[] data, int offset, int count, Charset encoding) >> throws UnsupportedEncodingException >> { >> init (data, offset, count, encoding.name()); >> } >> >> and then the same for getBytes(). > > OK. I think you can just add those methods. > >> But in general I anticipate that I'll continue to hit stubs or quirks >> in classpath so I'm trying to figure out how best to reach my goal, >> which will likely involve fixing up various things along the way. For >> instance, my first yak-shaving goal is to run the test suite for the >> core library of this app and then hack/fix until all the tests pass. > > In general, we follow Classpath except for a few core classes -- and > String is one of those. Major hacking on core classes requires compiler > changes, so I strongly recommend you don't do that. For example, better > not add any fields. But in general for almost the whole class library > you won't have so much trouble. I think it's only java.lang.Object and java.lang.Class that are "special" - i.e. could conceivably require compiler changes if you changed the field layout. As far as I can recall, String isn't really treated specially in any way. There should be no problem at all adding those methods and I would encourage you to go ahead and submit a patch. Bryce