Ok, if nobody minds I take this task and will provide the patch in a day or two.
On 10/16/06, Alexei Zakharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. Just tell me and I will commit the patch for EM(interpreter) and > JIT modes. I agree it will be better if you do this since I'm not very familiar with DRLVM code yet. So +1 for you to go ahead. Regards, 2006/10/16, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 10/16/06, Alexei Zakharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Moreover, the spec obliges us to do so. The real question is: is it RI > > bug or bug in spec? Personally I am for returning non-null values in > > all cases. > > > I agree. Just tell me and I will commit the patch for EM(interpreter) and > JIT modes. > BTW I think that we should create interpreter.emconf file and place all VM > properties needed for interpreter into this file. > So, in future, when we need to add more interpreter-mode option, we will not > affect the EM C++ code. -- Alexei Zakharov, Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division, Russia --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Mikhail Fursov
