On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 15:16 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > As long as OO.o limits itself to java features _already_ reimplemented > by free vms everything is ok (and note that it was not the case for > OO.o 2 features - people had to crash-write some gcj features so OO.o > could stay available. Moreover the number of FOSS platforms that will > be able to provide these features by OO.o 2 launch time will be fairly > limited)
GCJ is undergoing a period of intense development as a result of OOo. This is a good thing and should we use a feature that cannot be easily coded around within OOo I expect the GCJ community will again help us to code these features into their implementation. Often we push each other. As a direct result in the OOo upgrades I am sure that GCJ will be able to support many more Java applications without any change. I have heard Openoffice.org described as the gcc compiler test. The number of breaks we find in gcc as a direct result of the size of our code base is quite high. I expect this trend to continue with GCJ. -- Ken Foskey OpenOffice.org developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
