[PATCH] New C++ ABI compatibility changes.

Tom Tromey tromey@redhat.com
Mon Jan 15 09:15:00 GMT 2001

>>>>> "Alex" == Alexandre Petit-Bianco <apbianco@cygnus.com> writes:

Alex> 	(isAssignableFrom): Turned outline.
Alex> 	(isInstance): Likewise.
Alex> 	(isInterface): Likewise, fixed indentation.
Alex> 	(initializePrim): New function.

I forgot why these are needed.

Alex> +static java::lang::Class
Alex> +init_prim_class (jobject cname, jbyte sig, jint len, jobject array_vtable)
Alex> +{
Alex> +  static java::lang::Class iclass;
Alex> +  iclass.initializePrim (cname, sig, len, array_vtable);
Alex> +  return iclass;
Alex> +}

Now it occurs to me that maybe we could just have an initializing
constructor in Class instead of a no-arg constructor and a copy
constructor.  Then we wouldn't need this extra static class around.
Or, failing that, I also think we could just remove the `static' from
the iclass definition.


More information about the Java-patches mailing list