This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [PATCH] New C++ ABI compatibility changes.
- To: apbianco at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] New C++ ABI compatibility changes.
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Date: 15 Jan 2001 10:38:01 -0700
- Cc: java-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <200101150808.AAA16160@deliverance.cygnus.com>
- Reply-To: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Alex" == Alexandre Petit-Bianco <apbianco@cygnus.com> writes:
Alex> (isAssignableFrom): Turned outline.
Alex> (isInstance): Likewise.
Alex> (isInterface): Likewise, fixed indentation.
Alex> (initializePrim): New function.
I forgot why these are needed.
Alex> +static java::lang::Class
Alex> +init_prim_class (jobject cname, jbyte sig, jint len, jobject array_vtable)
Alex> +{
Alex> + static java::lang::Class iclass;
Alex> + iclass.initializePrim (cname, sig, len, array_vtable);
Alex> + return iclass;
Alex> +}
Now it occurs to me that maybe we could just have an initializing
constructor in Class instead of a no-arg constructor and a copy
constructor. Then we wouldn't need this extra static class around.
Or, failing that, I also think we could just remove the `static' from
the iclass definition.
Tom