Hi, On Sat, 2003-01-18 at 21:36, Tom Tromey wrote: > I was assuming that, like libgcj, Classpath would eventually have > other peer implementations. This change is premature in that we don't > have any others right now, but I don't think it makes the code less > clear. Overriding awt.toolkit internally isn't my preferred solution, > though the only reason is just "the JDK doesn't do it" (not exactly > compelling).
I thought you meant it to be a way for the VM to select which AWT implementation to select. And if that is the case then I would like to see one level of indirection (either a System property or a VM method) to select the desired Toolkit class. If Classpath actually had multiple implementations this could be a way to select one during configure time if we wanted that. Currently only specific VMs might have different AWT implementations and in that case I don't think adding this to Configure.java.in is a good idea. Cheers, Mark _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
