From kde-java Fri Apr 16 07:02:39 2004 From: Dominique Devriese Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 07:02:39 +0000 To: kde-java Subject: Re: [Kde-java] Should we ditch support for Sun's JDK in favour of Message-Id: <877jwg9zhs.fsf () student ! kuleuven ! ac ! be> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-java&m=108209897130066 Richard Dale writes: > On Thursday 15 April 2004 21:49, Dominique Devriese wrote: >> Richard Dale writes: >> > Maybe this is a rant, but I use LinuxPPC and the most recent >> > version of the jdk is 1.3.1. Here is a mail to the >> > java@gcc.gnu.org from Kevin Hendricks, who used to do Blackdown >> > ports to LinuxPPC I thought. >> > >> > Lets all move to gcj, what is the point of supporting Sun's stuff >> > unless we're paid - we don't need them? >> >> Are there specific problems with supporting the Sun and/or IBM JDKs >> ? I have no objection to remove the support, but if it's not too >> much work, why not keep it for those who need it ? > No problem at supporting the current JNI based bindings. They are > entirely autogenerated, so they'll always be there. I can keep the > api in step with version 2 of the bindings for KDE 3.3 - ie mainly > type safe emit and splitting the kde classes up into packages. Right. > But I'm thinking of version 2 of the java bindings that use dynamic > proxies, the Smoke library and AOP stuff. If I have to develop a JNI > version as well as a CNI (gcj specific) version it would mean extra > development time. JNI is really slow and harder to interface with > C++ than CNI. I see. Anyway, it's of course up to you and the other kdejava developers to decide on this. In the end, I don't think it matters much, people wanting to use the java bindings will not have too much trouble using gcj/gij, unless they really want to use the latest JDK features, I guess. cheers domi _______________________________________________ Kde-java mailing list Kde-java@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-java