[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Partial merge with Classpath

From: Mark Wielaard
Subject: Re: Partial merge with Classpath
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 22:48:18 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22i


[Discussion on address@hidden
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 09:20:56AM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Mark" == Mark Wielaard <address@hidden> writes:
> Do we want to use all of jazzlib in libgcj or do we just want to
> continue using zlib?
We could merge more classes then I have done now. Whether we want to
replace zlib completely with java code is a seperate question. As Per
Bothner already pointed out zlib is in use with a lot of programs and
Jazzlib is only of interest to the pure java crowed and is fairly new.

But only Deflater and Inflater use native code from zlib. We should
really look at merging the other classes that are already written in
java in both versions. I am CCing this to the Classpath list so people
can comment on how much code can be merged.

> Switching to jazzlib doesn't mean we can delete zlib from the
> repository -- we will still need it for gcj.  So there isn't a
> significant maintenance win there.
But it does mean one less library to link against for an application
compiled with gcj. But I don't know if that is such a great benefit.
> Even so I think there is a maintenance benefit to merging with
> Classpath.  For one thing it means more potential bug-fixers for the
> code.
That is the reason I am merging classes. Some differences will remain
but there are lots of classes that don't have to be maintained seperately.


Stuff to read:
  What's Wrong with Copy Protection, by John Gilmore

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]