Hi Kevin, Just to make sure I understand this approach: you want a (new or existing) Foo.Java file in the modules/javafx.web space that contains e.g. this:
public static int DIRECTIONALITY_LEFT_TO_RIGHT = Character. DIRECTIONALITY_LEFT_TO_RIGHT; Applying javac -h (which the build already does) will generate Foo.h In modules/javafx.web/src/main/native/Source/WTF/wtf/unicode/java/UnicodeJava.h we replace the #include java_lang_Character.h with #include Foo.h Is this correct? - Johan On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:13 PM Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi Johan, > > Thanks for filing the bug. > > If we really do need Character and IDN, then the cleanest approach might > be to define new fields in a suitable JavaFX class and assign the > appropriate values to them. > > > -- Kevin > > > > Johan Vos wrote: > > I filed a bug (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8192806) and I am > looking into it. > > It seems a bit weird to me that the java.lang.Character and java.net.IDN > header files are needed. I'll remove them and see where it fails. > But if they are needed (and they probably are), it won't be easy to > generate them with javac -h as that requires the source code instead of the > classfiles. That would require access to the java.lang.Character and > java.net.IDN java source code in OpenJDK, from within OpenJFX. > > - Johan > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:02 PM Kevin Rushforth < > kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> Hi Johan, >> >> Thanks for pointing this out. I had missed that this was targeted to JDK >> 10. >> >> We eliminated all but one use of javah, in favor of javac -h, in JDK 9 >> [1]. The only one remaining is in the web module. I can't remember why >> that wasn't switched at the same time (I have a fuzzy recollection that >> it might have had something to do with incremental compilation), but >> yes, it seems like this will need to be fixed. >> >> If you would like to file a bug then this would be a great thing for the >> community to work on. This will block us from moving to JDK 10 as a boot >> JDK, so if we end up doing that for JDK 10 then this would need to be >> done soon. >> >> Let me know if you would like to work on this. >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- Kevin >> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161704 >> >> >> Johan Vos wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I learned javah might be removed in Java 10 ( >> > http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/313) but as far as I know, it is still >> used in >> > OpenJFX: >> > >> > defineProperty("JAVAH", cygpath("$JDK_HOME/bin/javah${IS_WINDOWS ? >> '.exe' : >> > ''}")) >> > >> > Are there already plans to move to javac -h instead? >> > It seems a relative easy task that might be done by someone from the >> wider >> > community? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > - Johan >> > >> >
