When should _Jv_read() be used?..

Tom Tromey tromey@redhat.com
Wed Mar 14 18:40:00 GMT 2007


>>>>> "David" == David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com> writes:

David> In posix.h there are definitions for a bunch of functions with names
David> like _Jv_read(), _Jv_pipe(), that just wrap system calls of the same
David> name.

David> In CNI code in libgcj there are many places where the system calls are
David> done directly.  If I am hacking up libgcj, is there any disadvantage
David> to skipping the _Jv_* call and directly invoking the system call?

David> Also it looks like many of the _Jv_* things are only defined if
David> DISABLE_JAVA_NET is not defined.  That leads me to think...I don't
David> know what.

I think these must be obsolete.  Maybe they are from when the "no net"
case was directly integrated into the posix code, or maybe from when
we still thought that perhaps the windows port would share some code.

I don't think these are very useful, unless the various "#undef"s
somehow protect us from header badness.  But, if we're also making
direct calls, that seems unlikely.  Still, a bit of archaeology is
probably in order before we nuke these.

Tom



More information about the Java mailing list