X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4AA2A260.2010806@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:39:44 +0100
From:	Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: How stable is GCJ?
References:	<b227db7b0909041012v237e4208p83def73b10045f3e AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<b227db7b0909041012v237e4208p83def73b10045f3e@mail.gmail.com>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Sandeep Jindal wrote:

> I can spend time in debugging it, but my question/fear is that is GCJ
> stable enough to spend time on it. My program uses Java's
> Serialization, Collections and Math classes extensively, does GCJ has
> good support for these?

  The current release of gcj is hugely experimental.  I would advise not
spending much time on it.  The next one will be very much better, thanks to
the lessons learned from this test release.

    cheers,
      DaveK


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -