harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][NIO|VMI]JNI 1.4 enhancement on ByteBuffer
Date Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:50:11 GMT
Paulex Yang wrote:
> I think the kernel class means the classes which heavily depends on VM
> implementation, but the buffer is another story, it is the JNI actually
> depends on Classlib implementation, so instead of put buffers into
> kernel, I prefer to pull the three JNI methods out of VM into classlib.

If you export functions that implement the required JNI functionality
then VM-writers can either choose to use them directly (i.e. put the
function addresses in the JNI table), or choose to reach into the
classlib Java code.

Since the second option would require the VM to reach into
implementation details of NIO (which may change) the recommended way
would be to use the provided functions.

I agree that there is no need to label any NIO types 'kernel'.



Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org

View raw message