Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!aioe.org!news.glorb.com!news-spur2.glorb.com!homer.glorb.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: JNA performance
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 13:26:25 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <MPG.28309c4e432cd5be989735@news.justthe.net>
References: <tqmdnUiqqro_tlvQnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <t8qxp.16483$_P6.1037@newsfe05.iad>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xoAFiuXnRqdiUJrjkwExXQ.user.posting2.glorb.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@glorb.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 20:26:33 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4
X-Notice: Scanned by Mr. Bill
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:3825

In article <t8qxp.16483$_P6.1037@newsfe05.iad>, Knute Johnson says...


> I've not used JNA, JNI a little and a long time ago.  JNA looks easier 
> to use.

JNA is *unquestionably* easier to use. I've used both. Now I only use 
JNI's Invocation Interface on projects where I need to attach a JVM to a 
native thread.

If I need to call a native library, I use JNA.

-- 
Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support
sjsobol@JustThe.net