This is the mail archive of the
java-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: JvSynchronize nitpick
Paul Fisher <pnfisher@redhat.com> writes:
> 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.
The goal of CNI is seamless access to Java objects and methods
from C++, using *C++ syntax*. The goal is not to make C++ look like Java.
> 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++?
I don't understand where the "same natural Java construct" comes in.
Overloading operator[] is a standard C++ idiom, while
using a dummy object with a finalizer is the standard C++ idiom
for `try'-`finally', of which `synchronized' is a special case.
> We could simply say that `synchronized' is a reserved word when
> writing CNI, just as it is when writing Java.
We could, but I don't see why it would be a good idea.
--
--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/