[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: VMInterface addition: Make native library names part ofVMInterface
From: |
Jeroen Frijters |
Subject: |
RE: VMInterface addition: Make native library names part ofVMInterface |
Date: |
Tue, 4 Nov 2003 17:56:01 +0100 |
Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> Sorry, I think I misunderstood your message. I thought you were
> suggesting moving all the native methods (eg for IO classes) to
> separate VM* classes.
I think that is in fact what Mark was suggesting and I think this is
definitely a good idea. There are a lot of VMs that don't (want to) use
JNI for their "native" methods. Having all native methods in the VM*
classes makes this much easier.
> Right. I think there is a distinction, however, between what the VM
> must implement to operate with classpath - ie core VM classes like
> Class, Object, Throwable, Thread; and portable classes which
> happen to have native methods, such as java.io.File and
> java.net.PlainSocketImpl.
> The later are just normal classes with native methods, the
> implementations of which are typically be portable across different
> VMs.
This assumption is not true for some VMs. My VM (IKVM) has no native
methods and I'm pretty sure this is also true for JAOS and maybe others.
> So, they a system/platform interface rather than the VM
> interface.
> To put it another way, just because a method is native
> doesn't mean it interfaces with the VM.
The VM* classes don't mean "interfaces with the VM", but are a way for
VM implementers to easily replace their implementation. (The idea being
that the interface between the non-VM and VM classes is fairly stable).
Regards,
Jeroen
- RE: VMInterface addition: Make native library names part ofVMInterface,
Jeroen Frijters <=