Re: CNI and interface methods
Andrew Haley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Stephen Kell wrote: >> Actually we did implement a rather limited form of interface calls in >> CNI. Interfaces types are described in CNI headers with __attribute__ >> ((java_interface)), and the C++ compiler knows how to call a method >> on a type declared as such. >> >> What is missing in the C++ compiler (and the CNI headers) is >> knowledge of interface inheritance, so you have to manually cast >> interface references if the method you want to call was declared in a >> super-interface. >> >> This limitation is described here: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcj/Interfaces.html > > Thanks for this. I'm fine with that limitation, but there seems to be a > second thing missing too (missing in the same sense, i.e. that it > requires casts that ideally wouldn't be there). The question was: from > the C++ side, given a pointer p to some object implementing interface > J, is it safe to pass that pointer to a Java method who CNI prototype > looks like, for example, > > void foo(J *arg); > > or not? Clearly from C++ we can't do > > foo(p); > > because it won't type-check; but we can do the following. > > foo((J*) p); > > It now appears the answer is "yes, this is okay" (whereas I'd been > worried that maybe some multiple-inheritance-style pointer adjustment > was not being done and was causing the segfaults I was seeing). > > The CNI docs should probably say that these casts are fine and > indeed required. I'll gladly submit a small patch to the docs if you > agree (and let me know where's best for me to send it). java-patches is the best place to send it. In this case, an example is worth a thousand words. If you could write a reasonably small one to insert in your description, that would be great. Please don't write much, or we'd need to ask you for a copyright assignment. Andrew.