On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 09:45:05 GMT, Thomas Stuefe <stu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> Can we get rid of `JNICALL` too, please? >>> >>> Or would that change be too big? >> >> There's >1000 in java.base, lots more elsewhere, so it would be a lot of >> files and would hide the core changes. So maybe for a follow-up PR that does >> the one thing. > >> > Can we get rid of `JNICALL` too, please? >> > Or would that change be too big? >> >> There's >1000 in java.base, lots more elsewhere, so it would be a lot of >> files and would hide the core changes. So maybe for a follow-up PR that does >> the one thing. > > Yeah. I count >8000 places in total... > > Maybe just define JNICALL to be empty in jni_md.h for now. @tstuefe Your comment reminded me of another important cleanup, to remove `__stdcall` (and `_stdcall`, an accepted but not recommended variant) from the code base. This only has meaning on 32-bit Windows. Furthermore, when searching for this, I found additional code that is looking for symbol names of "__stdcall format", i.e. `<name>@<number>`. This is not needed anymore. I'll delete it where I find it, but there might be other places that I'm missing. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21744#issuecomment-2455215002
