This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: CNI vs JNI in performance?

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Martin Egholm Nielsen <martin at egholm-nielsen dot dk>
Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 10:29:09 +0100
Subject: Re: CNI vs JNI in performance?
References: <ckg08e$rk9$1@sea.gmane.org><200410120931.24047.konqueror@gmx.de><416B9482.6010404@egholm-nielsen.dk>

Martin Egholm Nielsen writes:
 > 
 > >>I've browsed the archives, but cannot find the answer:
 > >>Which is the better to use: CNI or JNI?
 > >>This is regarding rapid invocations from Java (for talking with a
 > >>rs485-device) transferring byte-arrays back and forth...
 > >>I was wondering which method has the most overhead, etc...
 > > CNI is the one with less overhead, its just not so portable as only 
 > > gcj/g++ support it yet. "Portability" is the domain of JNI for now.
 > And this is with respect to both speed and memory?

Yes: it's just a straightforward call.

Andrew.

References:
- CNI vs JNI in performance?
  - From: Martin Egholm Nielsen
- Re: CNI vs JNI in performance?
  - From: Michael Koch
- Re: CNI vs JNI in performance?
  - From: Martin Egholm Nielsen

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]