Re: note on debian and JNI

[Jeff Sturm <jsturm at sigma6 dot com>]

Per Bothner wrote:
> Perhaps JNI should have higher priority than we have given it?  I
> don't know if Cygnus currently has scheduled work on JNI.  I've
> mentioned before my ideas for how we can implement JNI relatively
> easily while keeping JNI's overhead to a minumum.  If someone (Cygnus
> or other) wants to tackle the project, I'll be happy to give my
> suggestions.  (Actually, you'll have a hardtime stopping me from
> giving my opinions!)

I actually need JNI for a current project... if we use gcj I may have to
implement it.  I'm working that out with my employer.  If we decide to
move forward with gcj/JNI, I'll certainly let you know.

We will also need some new calls in CNI before we can fully implement
JNI... in that case I'll write a proposal and post to this list.  But I
have no idea yet if/when I can begin work on it.

-- 
Jeff Sturm
jsturm@sigma6.com