From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32231 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2007 13:57:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 32223 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jul 2007 13:57:55 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,SARE_RMML_Stock10,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 13:57:53 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6CDvkXh017231 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:57:50 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6CDmtFU016305 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:48:55 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6CDmr3C025076; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:48:54 -0400 Message-ID: <46963159.30402@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 13:57:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070530) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Haley CC: frysk@sourceware.org Subject: Re: cni vs jni References: <4694F12E.6080406@redhat.com> <18069.3978.11236.967269@zebedee.pink> In-Reply-To: <18069.3978.11236.967269@zebedee.pink> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q3/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 How does BC (binary compatible abi) fit into all this? (I know frysk's build system needs to be changed, but there are compatibility issues?) Andrew Haley wrote: > Andrew Cagney writes: > > [This was today's technical topic] > > > Possible options > > > > - simplistically translate the bindings into JNI > > > > - push more core code into C++ and move the bindings to a higher layer > > > > - status quo > > Or port CNI to Sun's Java. It's far from impossible, and as far as I > an see the only real obstacle is getting buy-in from the GNU C++ > maintainers. > > Andrew. > >