Re: JvSynchronize nitpick

[Paul Fisher <pnfisher at redhat dot com>]

Per Bothner <per@bothner.com> writes:

> It's a ok solution to a non-problem, I feel.

CNI allows for a near seamless transition when switching between
writing Java and C++ code.  The more seamless we can make that
transition, the better.

For instance, we add a length attribute and overload [] for arrays in
CNI.  Why not allow the same natural Java construct for `synchronized'
to be used in C++?

We could simply say that `synchronized' is a reserved word when
writing CNI, just as it is when writing Java.