On 2015-11-27 14:28, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello,
The javac-server feature wasn't compatible with bootcycle-images. This
fix is a bit of hack, but so was the original bootcycle
implementation. We probably need to take a step back and figure out a
better model for this later.
I agree on that.
Hello,
The javac-server feature wasn't compatible with bootcycle-images. This
fix is a bit of hack, but so was the original bootcycle implementation.
We probably need to take a step back and figure out a better model for
this later.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144172
Webre
Hello,
On 2015-11-27 02:21, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Erik,
On 26/11/2015 6:17 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello,
This is not sjavac, but just the rather new feature javac-server. It
takes the client/server model from sjavac and applies it to plain old
javac. What this means is that when we invoke
On 26/11/15 21:21, David Holmes wrote:
> Strictly speaking it is of course reachable, but if we do reach it we
> expect never to return. As per the thread Mario pointed to we ran into
> problems trying to mark this as not returning. But I wonder whether
> lying to the compiler about the reachabi
