[java-gnome-hackers] topic for discussion

[Jeffrey M. <ku...@zo...>]

On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 21:48, Bob Fischer wrote: 
>  3. One might consider building CNI bindings for the GTK+ calls, rather
> than the current JNI bindings.  These would certainly be smaller and
> more efficient when using GCJ.  CNI bindings could also sidestep the
> dynamic library loading problems I experienced (although I sidestepped
> them without CNI).  However, the added work of keeping two sets of
> bindings up to date might not be worth it.

This is something that I have thought about for a very long time.
There are many pros and cons to support CNI. I would like to know
what each of you think.

-Jeff