public inbox for java@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bernd Kreimeier <bk@lokigames.com>
To: Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>
Cc: java-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com, classpath@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for CNI/JNI problems
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <14465.8056.983245.57682@ares.lokigames-lan.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2k8laj0qe.fsf@magnus.bothner.com>

Per Bothner writes:
 > of that with a direct field access in CNI.  Following that chain
 > can be difficult when (e.g.) a jfieldID is cached.  It may require
 > some global analysis (i.e. more than a single method).

That's what I meant. So, it should be easier to do the reverse
(expand CNI to JNI calls) but then ID caching and other
optimizations would have to be added automatically as well?

 > > If a hypothetical G++ "emit-jni" option would generate JNI C 
 > 
 > G++ emits assembly code, not C. -femit-jni would emit binary
 > code *equivalent* to JNI C (i.e. *as if* compiled from JNI C),
 > but not actually C.

I know that's the current proposal. Why is CNI-to-JNI C conversion
out of the question? It would address some issues (like
porting to non-G++ platforms, Hans Boehm's point (2), etc.).

 > Those are certainly important concerns.  We may have to settle
 > for conditional compilation in tricky cases. 

OK IMO. Now, wouldn't CNI-to-JNI C ease identifying related
problems? 

Is it significantly easier to map on assembly level?
There'd be little point in a C level conversion if this
inevitably led to "cfront-with-Java-structs" for mixed
C++/CNI code. Is that the case?

                                     b.

  reply	other threads:[~2000-04-01  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-04-01  0:00 Paul Fisher
2000-04-01  0:00 ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00   ` Paul Fisher
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Aaron M. Renn
2000-04-01  0:00       ` Stuart Ballard
2000-04-01  0:00         ` Chris Blizzard
2000-04-01  0:00           ` Chris Blizzard
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00   ` Jochen Hoenicke
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Stuart Ballard
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Jon Olson
2000-04-01  0:00   ` Bernd Kreimeier
2000-04-01  0:00     ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00       ` Bernd Kreimeier
2000-04-01  0:00         ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00           ` Bernd Kreimeier [this message]
2000-04-01  0:00             ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00               ` Bernd Kreimeier
2000-04-01  0:00                 ` Per Bothner
2000-04-01  0:00                   ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-04-01  0:00                   ` Bernd Kreimeier
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-04-01  0:00 Lam.Mark
2000-04-01  0:00 ` Aaron M. Renn
2000-04-01  0:00   ` Brian Jones
2000-04-01  0:00 Boehm, Hans
2000-04-01  0:00 David Pettersson
2000-04-01  0:00 ` Per Bothner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=14465.8056.983245.57682@ares.lokigames-lan.com \
    --to=bk@lokigames.com \
    --cc=classpath@gnu.org \
    --cc=java-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com \
    --cc=per@bothner.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).