harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Varlamov" <alexey.v.varla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] support gc_cc and original verifier
Date Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:54:43 GMT
OK, given nobody objected - should we do it before M5?
As old verifier is never used and gc_cc have known problems and
limitations (e.g. no support for uncompressed references), I think we
should.

--
Alexey

2008/2/15, Pavel Rebriy <pavel.rebriy@gmail.com>:
> +1 - old verifier is moving to archive
>
> On 13/02/2008, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm ok for the verifier. Pavel R? I would suggest adding a link from
> > Harmony web site to the original verifier referencing it as
> > demonstrating an approach for java verification based on subroutine
> > inlining. At the moment I wrote the code this was interesting for some
> > researches and might attract them to our project.
> >
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2008 4:09 PM, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > there is a number of bugs in gc_cc and not that many volunteers to fix
> > them,
> > > do we need to continue support it or we better move to archive?
> > >
> > > the same for original verifier: a number of bugs found in both
> > > verifiers were fixed in the default one (verifier-3363) only, should
> > > we move the original one into archive?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mikhail
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > With best regards,
> >
> > Alexei
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Pavel Rebriy
>

Mime
View raw message