[armedbear-devel] new jcall / jar:file: path functions

Alan Ruttenberg alanruttenberg at gmail.com
Fri Jan 8 21:47:38 UTC 2010

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Kind of curious: Why are you not just using the jsint implementation?
> Well, one reason being that their implemetation requires a call to
> setAccessible() which is defined to be allowed to raise a security
> exception. The method Alessio implemented (and I figured out long ago
> in order to implement USOCKET on ABCL) doesn't have that drawback.
> When this strategy can't work, well, I guess we'll need to revisit and
> go the security exception route.

If it happens to raise a security exception, one can deal with it
then. I've used the jsint implementation for a long time now and I
don't recall that happening once.

>> It's been in use for quite a while and it would certainly make my life
>> easier to be able to continue to use that interface. For example, I
>> use their findMethod implementation to get a method so I can optimize
>> certain loops by avoiding dynamic lookup each time.
> Right. We want to start doing caching like that too, based on the
> object class, method name and the argument classes. That would be what
> you need, right?

Yes. However I am concerned that this is work that need not be done,
freeing up time to do other things. The jsint implementation does what
is necessary and is the product of a good deal of thought and
experience. Seems to me that using mature code is preferable to
re-implementing stuff.


(and thanks for your efforts, in any case!)

More information about the armedbear-devel mailing list