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: JNI Performance

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at mckinlay dot net dot nz>
Cc: Java <java at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: 09 Nov 2003 17:29:27 -0700
Subject: Re: JNI Performance
References: <482B279A-0759-11D8-BB2F-003065F97F7C@mckinlay.net.nz><16285.42929.469047.16124@creche.redhat.com><544ED8A4-118F-11D8-88E8-003065F97F7C@mckinlay.net.nz><87smkxaxq1.fsf@fleche.redhat.com><D0655171-1315-11D8-A30D-003065F97F7C@mckinlay.net.nz>
Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com

>>>>> "Bryce" == Bryce McKinlay <bryce@mckinlay.net.nz> writes:

Bryce> Well, I don't see any problem with that as far as binary compatibility
Bryce> is concerned. Things like _Jv_Throw have well-defined semantics, and
Bryce> as the maintainers of the runtime, we are in a good position to make
Bryce> sure that they don't change in incompatible ways.

Yeah, I suppose we could just give new names to functions when we
change their interfaces.  Maybe I'll close that new PR 

Tom

References:
- Re: JNI Performance
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: JNI Performance
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: JNI Performance
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

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