This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Java-Gnome: jni or cni
- From: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>
- To: java-gnome-developer at lists dot sourceforge dot net
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org, debian-java at lists dot debian dot org, kaffe at kaffe dot org, sablevm-developer at lists dot sourceforge dot net
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:46:21 -0800
- Subject: Re: Java-Gnome: jni or cni
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
- References: <20040311174441.GA26451@pathfinderii.chu.cam.ac.uk>
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 09:44, Mark Howard wrote:
> The big question is: should we switch to CNI?
As much as I like CNI, and want to promote gcj usage, and to the extent
that supporting both CNI and JNI is not an option, then I believe that
java-gnome should stick with JNI.
I don't believe there are immediate technical reasons for preferring JNI
over CNI, however, I feel that the case for making java-gnome available
to the largest possible community of developers is very compelling.
History backs this up. Look at Gnome-GCJ (CNI bindings) -vs- java-gnome
(JNI bindings). While the Gnome-GCJ technology was really cool, I think
the limited audience for this package was instrumental in it's lagging
behind java-gnome.
For developers who are just learning about CNI and are excited about
programming with it, you will still be able to write application code
with CNI. CNI and JNI _do_ mix.
AG
--
Anthony Green <green@redhat.com>
Red Hat, Inc.