From: Steve D. P. <mai...@st...> - 2003-12-02 20:02:21
|
> > >>- No one seems to care about the performance of the U-A-U >> solution. If they do, they can build their own UNICOWS or >> pure UNICODE version of the library themselves. Therefore, >> for the moment, the universal U-A-U libgcj would become the >> de facto standard, as weird as that may seem. >> >> >> > >OK, as long as above is agreed by everyone. Make the slow-but-universal >A-U-A >the default and that is what gets distributed as 'official' libgcj. The >thought of multiple libgcj's (multiplied by number of releases, and all >with same name) makes me shudder. > Sounds perfect (err, well... closer to perfect, at least!). |