Don't assume JavaVMOption::optionString is signed/unsigned #419
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Depending on the compiler target the `JavaVMOption::optionString` may be `*mut u8` or `*mut i8`. For example, when compiling with `aarch64-linux-android` it is `u8` and when compiling with `x86_64-pc-windows-msvc` it is `i8`
argv-minus-one
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Depending on the compiler target the
JavaVMOption::optionStringmay be*mut u8or*mut i8.For example, when compiling with
aarch64-linux-androidit isu8and when compiling withx86_64-pc-windows-msvcit isi8TODO: ideally we should incorporate an Android build into the CI, since that's a very likely use case for the
jnicrate. (luckily this isn't a big issue for Android because theinvocationfeature isn't really applicable to Android)