Re: JNI issues

[Martin Kahlert <martin dot kahlert at infineon dot com>]

Hi!

On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 10:13:27AM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Martin" == Martin Kahlert <martin.kahlert@infineon.com> writes:
> 
> Martin> Is this the right thing to do?
> 
> It is pretty good.
> 
> There are some coding style problems in the patch.

I assume, i should find out the correct formatting options for vim, first.
Or do you mean the coding itself?

> Also, before I can apply it I need the appropriate paperwork from you.
> It will take me a while to dig this up, as the FSF changed their
> procedures.

For these ~10 lines of quite trivial code? Are you kidding?

> Martin> I used this patch to avoid a segfault in
> Martin> java::lang::System::init_properties:
> 
> I'd be suprised if the invocation API works for you, even with this
> change.

You are right. It doesn't.
I used some other patches (for example in the
instanciation of the new thread the thread's name must not be NULL),
but i got stuck inside natThread.cc:

void _Jv_SetCurrentJNIEnv (JNIEnv *env)
{ 
 java::lang::Thread *t = _Jv_ThreadCurrent ();
 JvAssert (t != NULL);
 puts("natThread.cc: Hier ist der Bug (t == NULL)");
 ((natThread *) t->data)->jni_env = env;
}

where _Jv_ThreadCurrent() returns NULL and thus the last line results in
a SegFault.

Do you think, that the invocation API can be corrected, or do you think, that
it has to be rewritten from ground? I don't have the overview to decide this.

Unfortunately i will be on vacation (learning for PhD) and will be loaded
with other work for about a month. After that, i could spend more time on
this.

Thanks for all your help,
Martin.

-- 
The early bird gets the worm. If you want something else for       
breakfast, get up later.