There's a point where this becomes "change for the sake of change"
perhaps we should stick with "if it's not broken, make no attempt to fix
it".
Is Java's presence hurting anyone. Yes. Is GCJ's presence hurting
anyone? No.
That was phrased badly, I hate Java, but GCJ can make it produce
something that performs well. I don't use it nearly as often as I ought
to I confess but it is still useful.
I have never used Ada (no offense, it does have some cool things, I like
subtypes with ranges for example).
I think many are like me in that if Python isn't fast enough and one
wants to experiment/prototype something, one turns to Java for the GC.
If memory is trivial to manage to C++. (sidenote, wxPython and wxWidgets
FTW) There is no practical reason to replace Java as a default. Anyone
using Ada or Go already expects to have to specify it.
It was said before (when this first started) that Go wasn't ready.
Another language that looks cool but has yet to mature.
The test cases are very important though, I doubt there is a person here
who would claim otherwise. Unless we can be absolutely sure we are not
missing any tests we ought not change.
Tests (from what I have seen) are gathered empirically, just yesterday I
saw a stack-overflow question that found a bug in GCC,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59123 a new test case was
born. This should make them precious.
Alec
On 13/11/13 16:00, Tom Tromey wrote:
"Jeff" == Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> writes:
Jeff> Given the problems Ian outlined around adding Go to the default
Jeff> languages and the build time issues with using Ada instead of Java,
Jeff> I'm unsure how best to proceed.
IIRC from upthread the main reason to keep one of these languages is
-fnon-call-exceptions testing.
How about just writing some tests for that, in C++? It may not be quite
as good but it seems like it could be a reasonable first pass; with more
obscure issues caught by subsequent testing, much as is the case for
non-core targets.
Tom
