Re: State of the VM interface

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Roman" == Roman Kennke <address@hidden> writes:

Roman> I investigated the state of our VM interface by looking at the stuff in
Roman> native/jni and here are the classes that seem to directly access native
Roman> code without utilizing a VM interface:

I think there are already PRs for most of these.
I would suggest filing PRs for the remaining ones and making a
"native code out of core" meta-PR linking to them all.

Roman> The remaining stuff is for the midi and iconv providers, I think these
Roman> are optional anyway and don't belong in a VM interface (or do they?).

No, they don't belong in a VM interface.  A provider is already behind
an interface wall.  IMO the appropriate approach here is to simply
write multiple providers.

Tom