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: gnu.gcj.RawData vs. long

From: Bryce McKinlay <bmckinlay at gmail dot com>
To: Craig Vanderborgh <craigvanderborgh at gmail dot com>
Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:17:51 +0100
Subject: Re: gnu.gcj.RawData vs. long
References: <CAG6o7Q8jwb1_UuGMorjPUinOnwObX9mPFL0MfJ=taLHEFkRiQg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Craig Vanderborgh
<craigvanderborgh@gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem is that gnu.gcj.RawData * is not portable. ?The question
> is: can I use "long" for the type instead without garbage collection
> problems? ?Can my native code store the pointer value in a Java "long"
> in the CNI with impunity, or will Boehm GC think these pointers needs
> to be considered for collection?

Hi Craig.

You must use gnu.gcj.RawData* if the reference being stored points to
something allocated by the GC. The GC will not mark references held in
non-pointer types.

If it's something that was allocated outside the GC (ie, with malloc),
it should be fine to use a long.

Bryce

References:
- gnu.gcj.RawData vs. long
  - From: Craig Vanderborgh

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