On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 11:42:08AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Platform = Machine + OS. I don't have any reference, but I believe that > > Etienne is right in saying that the same library should be usuable with > > all JVMs on a specific platform. > > But it's not necessarily possible. Clearly it's desirable, no > argument there.
The JNI specification says otherwise. > > All the Java code would ever see are RawData references, but the JNI > > layer knows that all RawData references are actually 32 or 64 bit (or > > whatever that platform requires). > > This seems to be identical to my proposal. > > I no longer understand what we're arguing about... Why don't you show me the native couterpart of your proposal? I've been asking for it for some time, now, so that we can comment on it. If it's better than my proposal, fine, but I need to actually see it to make my mind about it. I've been showing code specifically so that we discuss about *concrete* things. Etienne -- Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/ _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
