Re: API clean up patch

[Andrew Haley]

Archie Cobbs writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > You don't explain why you want this.  As I understand it, VMblah.java
 > > files are provided as templates for code that is target-specific.  Why
 > > is that a bad thing?
 > 
 > It's not a bad thing... however, doesn't it bother you that the API
 > from a stock Classpath doens't even make sense, even if it's only
 > supposed to be a "template"?

The API makes perfectly good sense.

 > As a template it's a pretty bad example because it couldn't
 > possibly work. Doesn't really make me proud, for one.
 > 
 > > Why do you assume that VMThread.countStackFrames(),
 > > VMThrowable.fillInStackTrace(), and VMThrowable.getStackTrace() will
 > > be native?
 > 
 > I'm not trying to assume anything. 

When the VMblah classes were first introduced, the justification was
that they would isolate platform-specific code.  Each VM would have
its own versions of these classes.  But expecting any VM to run
Classpath without modifying the VMblah classes as was the original
intention is IMO quite unreasonable.

 > I'm only trying to make it at least theoretically possible for a VM
 > to use Classpath unmodified and still function properly.

To what end?

Andrew.