On 11/01/2010 05:50 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Steven" == Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> writes: > > Steven> The argument against disabling java as a default language always was > Steven> that there should be at least one default language that requires > Steven> non-call exceptions. I recall testing many patches without trouble if > Steven> I did experimental builds with just C, C++, and Fortran, only to find > Steven> lots of java test suite failures in a complete bootstrap+test cycle. > Steven> So the second point is, IMVHO, not really true. > > Is it possible to convert all failures of this form into a C++ test case > with -fnon-call-exceptions? If so then at least there is a way to add > regression tests.
In practice, no. We don't know what the C++ equivalent is until we've seen the Java (or Ada) test failure. In the Rumsfeld epistemology it's an unknown uknown, something that we don't know we don't know. > Steven> Is it possible to build and test java without all of libjava? > > As far as I'm aware, not at present. I think even the minimal possible > subset of libjava is pretty big, on the order of hundreds of classes, > IIRC. And the failures I've seen have been in some of the crazy cases, not just simple Java code, where things get complicated. Andrew.
