This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: JNI without Jni_Lookup() ?
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: gnustuff at thisiscool dot com
- Cc: Erik Poupaert <erik dot poupaert at skynet dot be>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 19 Apr 2004 11:19:17 -0600
- Subject: Re: JNI without Jni_Lookup() ?
- References: <TSOI82FAE9FEA8B9RN87E0M3ZVQID65.408328e3@p733>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Mohan" == Mohan Embar <gnustuff@thisiscool.com> writes:
Mohan> I personally like CNI a lot. For me, being able to verify
Mohan> method signatures at compile time instead of runtime is the
Mohan> same kind of good feeling that I don't get when doing the sort
Mohan> of creepy, dynamic, runtime method resolution you get with JNI
It would be pretty helpful if we had a tool that could check this sort
of thing at build time. I picture something that looks at class files
using jcf-dump and object files using nm, and reports missing or
"extra" JNI functions. That would be useful for Classpath and Gtk
peer development.
Tom