On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Andrew Hughes <gnu.and...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Fair enough. What needs to happen for us to move on to 1.7 and >> eventually 1.8 which both have classfile format and language changes? > > Even OpenJDK doesn't do this for all class files and 1.8 is not going to be > released for nearly a year. > > The only one I see a point in is 1.8 when we start to implement code that uses > lambdas. The rest don't give a significant advantage against preventing ease > of building the code.
One of the problems is that GNU Classpath needs 1.6 APIs and VM features to run applications written in JRuby and Scala and I expect them to start relying more on 1.7 features soon. So we're now in a situation where GNU Classpath still pretends to be 1.5 (with additional APIs) but the VMs need to advertise 1.6 and 1.7 support... On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Andrew Hughes <gnu.and...@redhat.com> wrote: > As a prerequisite, gcj would still have to be able to build if these changes > were > integrated. It currently doesn't have a 1.7 compiler. That's something I'm > looking into > with getting support for the latest ecj into Classpath. That would be awesome.
