cni-changes documented?

Wed Mar 17 07:01:00 GMT 2004

Jakob Praher writes:
 > 
 > from lurking on the thread "Java-Gnome: jni or cni", Andrew Haley
 > introduced a redesigned cni, which would allow other vms to support it.
 > (Maybe I missed something here)
 > 
 > Are these changes documented somewhere?
We have no intention of making CNI truly multi-VM compatible. That
isn't a design goal, and would present some severe technical
difficulties.
What we must do, however, is switch from using pointers to using smart
pointers: this is a matter of declaration rather than use. 
i.e.
 ::java::lang:foo *bar
becomes
 ref<::java::lang:foo> bar
that's all.
 > The cni.sgml is rather old (at least my cvs tells me this).
 > 
 > Andrew: In your mail titled "Binary Compatibilty ABI work" you mention
 > that you have some patches for compiling whole jars to shared objects,
 > thus enabling optimization on a jar level. What is the status on this?
It already works.
However, there are compatibility issues I'm working on. My latest
plan is to make a CVS branch in which to commit the current state.
This is somewhat experimental, so it isn't suitable for mainline.
Andrew.