Andrew Zhang wrote: > An existing application depends on this feature, but I can't say it's > important.
Reading the other responses, I have to agree that it sounds like you are looking for this change for an application use rather than Harmony implementation, and we don't really want to go there :-) Don't you want this application to work on other compatible JRE's? > I don't think java developers want to distribute their product as jars + > .so/.dll. ...and yet, that is what they would have to do in the case they depend upon JNI calls. > Since Harmony has the java side wrapper, package friend is also > not the problem. The application is using reflection for this functionality > for other platforms. > > Well, if it conflicts with our current convention, just ignore my > suggestion. Thanks. Nice try <g> (and let us know when we can try this application!) Regards, Tim
