On 18/08/2008, Ian Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > currently there are 3 patches waiting to go into GNU Classpath from > Jikes RVM: >
Note that 0.98 is very imminent i.e. I'd like it to be released this week and most of it has already been merged to GCJ. > 1) Thread Local improvements: > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/RVM-185 > > http://jikesrvm.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jikesrvm/rvmroot/trunk/build/components/patches/classpath-cvs.RVM-185.patch?revision=13369&view=markup > I believe this is stalled waiting for Daniel's FSF paper work. This > patch would be a big performance win for many VMs. > The assignment is still pending. The last e-mail I have is Daniel's assignment form on 11th June. I've pinged to see what's going on. > 2) ZipEntry improvements: > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/RVM-392 > > http://jikesrvm.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jikesrvm/rvmroot/trunk/build/components/patches/classpath-cvs.RVM-392.patch?revision=14005&view=markup > This patch cleans up the use of Calendar in ZipEntry and avoids > unnecessary bouncing between UNIX and DOS time formats. Possible > bootstrap issues were raised by Tom Tromey, so the patch is still > pending. Here's the e-mail thread: > > http://www.nabble.com/RFC%3A-tweaks-to-java.util.zip.ZipEntry-to15289313.html#a15289313 > I'm sceptical about committing this one for 0.98 if there may be issues. I assume the gain is it not using a synchronized method to initialise the Calendar? Have you considered the initialization on demand holder idiom instead? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initialization_on_demand_holder_idiom It's also mentioned in the JSR166 book by Doug Lea et. al. I can see why initialising Calendar as a prerequisite for zip support might cause a lot of problems and I don't think we have time to test it well enough for this release. > 3) AIX build fix: > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/RVM-526 > > http://jikesrvm.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jikesrvm/rvmroot/trunk/build/components/patches/classpath-cvs.RVM-526.patch?revision=14551&view=markup > This is a small patch that fixes a problem for builds on AIX, I believe > it would be safe to commit it. > I think I've seen this before. Seems fine. Can you forward it for discussion on cp-patches? > I'd like to push these patches up stream. For 2 and 3 please could > people complain if they think they are an issue for their VM, I believe > they are both steps in the right direction. For 1 could someone chase up > the paper work? > > Thanks, > Ian Rogers > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Jikesrvm-core mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jikesrvm-core > -- Andrew :-) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://openjdk.java.net PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
