FYI: submitted ecj patch upstream

Mon Oct 9 17:56:00 GMT 2006

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>>> Tom> I've submitted my ecj patch to eclipse.org. This patch adds the new
>> Tom> gcc-specific driver to ecj, and is needed by the work on the
>> Tom> gcj-eclipse branch.
>>>> Tom> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=159641
>>>> So, we've had a minor setback here -- the eclipse maintainers accepted
>> part of this patch, but not all of it.
>>>> I looked at writing an "ecj1" driver that does a pure translation of
>> command-line arguments, but I don't think that is possible due to our
>> need to differentiate between "primary" and "dependency" classes on
>> the output end.
>>>> My current plan is to make a new cvs repository somewhere, import the
>> upstream ecj, and apply the needed patch. Then we can do periodic
>> imports from upstream and make our own ecj.jar available.
>>>> Another idea would be to maintain just "GCCMain.java" separately. If
>> we went this route I think we would make our own "ecj1.jar", holding
>> just this class, available, and have users download the eclipse.org
>> ecj.jar separately.
>> I think this is a very very bad idea as it means we have to go out
> and grab too many things.
> Why not just create a C program that converts the options and place
> that into the GCC repo and have it build with the rest of the compiler?
>> Using Java too much is not a good thing.

Are there any legal or technical barriers to maintaining GCCMain.java in 
the GCC source tree and generating ecj1.jar during the build process? I 
quick scan of GCCMain.java suggests there's more to it than simply 
converting options.
 - Joel