This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Q about libjava, JNI, and CNI
- From: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>
- To: Jerry Quinn <jlquinn at optonline dot net>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:26:12 -0400
- Subject: Re: Q about libjava, JNI, and CNI
- References: <16608.56690.947797.401044@localhost.localdomain>
Jerry Quinn wrote:
Perusing the library code, I noticed that a lot of it is now
implemented in JNI as opposed to CNI. Is there a set policy of no
longer using CNI to implement native portions of the runtime?
No. A decision was made to implement the GTK AWT peers in JNI, as
opposed to CNI, because the advantages of being able to share the
development effort with other runtimes was seen to outweigh the ease &
performance advantages of CNI. In other areas, however, particularly
where performance is important or where a method must interface with the
native parts of the runtime, CNI is still encouraged. This does not mean
JNI is not allowed, but the decision would have to be made on a case by
case basis.
Regards
Bryce