------- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 16:58 ------- I think it isn't correct to use "gcc" directly. You probably have to introduce a new variable.
But, I don't see why we need ecjx.cc at all. I think it must be to work around some other problem. Maybe instead we could just fix that problem directly. Apparently it came in here, though I don't see why: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2008-q4/msg00067.html See also PR 38396 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40868
