Hi,
the second explanation is the right one
You can find plenty of documentation on the JNI at
http://www.transvirtual.com/~peter/native/
Regards,
--
Philippe Laporte Tel: (510) 527-4025 ext 14
Transvirtual Technologies, Inc., Fax: (510) 559-3287
Berkeley,
Nic Ferrier wrote:
> Is native more efficient?
Yep. You can access the java objects more directly. The 'kaffeh'
tool generates a .h file that maps a java type to a C typedef, so you
can access fields simply and directly.
> Or is it simply that jni was firmed up long after most of kaffe was
>
Nic Ferrier writes:
> Or is it simply that jni was firmed up long after most of kaffe was
> written and "native" is the historic native interface for Kaffe?
Yep..
-Archie
__
Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * h
Kaffe uses 2 different native interfaces... "native" seems to be kaffe
specific but also the standard jni.
Is there a design reason for this? Is native more efficient?
Or is it simply that jni was firmed up long after most of kaffe was
written and "native" is the historic native interface for K
