You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Or otherwise said, do I expect of the library to "wrap"/generate marshalling code (and if so, to which extent?), or should I declare my native methods to take something as close as possible to the Java types? In this case, jstring. But that fails like:
/mnt/data/dev/mapbox-jnihpp/include/jni/tagging.hpp:130:40: required by substitution of ‘template<class T> using UntaggedType = decltype (jni::Untag(declval<T>())) [with T = jni::jstring]’
/mnt/data/dev/mapbox-jnihpp/include/jni/tagging.hpp:124:64: error: ‘const struct jni::jstring’ has no member named ‘get’
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Use jni::Local<jni::String> in place of jstring for both java->native and native->Java methods.
The standard types - jni::jstring, jni::jobject, etc are part of the low-level API. You can use them, but for methods taking Unique parameters you'll need to create an ownership type wrapper first, see jni::NewLocal.
Or otherwise said, do I expect of the library to "wrap"/generate marshalling code (and if so, to which extent?), or should I declare my native methods to take something as close as possible to the Java types? In this case, jstring. But that fails like:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: