RFC: micro-libgcj merge proposal

Fri Jan 13 20:51:00 GMT 2006

>>>>> "Per" == Per Bothner <per@bothner.com> writes:

Per> In my pre-processing model, adding preprocessing in libgcj involves
Per> little more than adding some comments to the source code. So it
Per> should be a fairly minor cost maintaining them. If the directives
Per> get broken, it's not difficult to fix.
Yes, I understand. But in the scenario where we unilaterally add
preprocessing, it is very likely that I am going to be doing this
merging. After all, I'm already doing it for the other divergences we
maintain, see the patches last week. (And I think there are more to
come after that...)
And, to be really clear about this, I'm not willing to do this work
for preprocessed source. In fact I want us to have fewer divergences,
not more.
Tom