But how is that connected to the concern expressed?

Problem: If the JVM ecosystem starts to depend more on native code it gets less pleasant to work with.

Answer: There is this command line flag that is used to activate the FFI.

There doesn't seem to be any relation between these two things, unless you're trying to imply that because of the flag people just won't use the FFI at all and will write pure Java instead. Which would be strange, as the justification for investing so much into Panama in the first place is the expectation that it will be used, because native code is getting more important rather than less.

There are two ways to avoid the JVM ecosystem becoming crappy due to native code:

1. Encourage the development of pure Java libraries.

2. Make native code work better.

Panama tries to do (2) but it's got a lot of missing functionality that the scripting lang ecosystems nail. How do you compile a Java library that uses native code? Python/Node/Ruby worlds know how, but OpenJDK ignores the question. How do you ship a Java library that uses native code? Python/Node/Ruby worlds know, but OpenJDK ignores the question. These problems have been pointed out before and Panama guys just say not in scope.

The community hasn't come together to solve these problems either. Maven/Gradle are too disorganized to come up with answers in the absence of any leadership from OpenJDK. Everyone reinvents the wheel when it comes to loading shared libs from JARs. It's a mess and nobody is solving it.

So that leaves (1), encourage the development of pure Java libs. This also isn't working. People write in C/C++/Rust because that way everyone can access the functionality regardless of what ecosystem they work in, so such projects get the biggest collection of stakeholders. That's more important that implementation language, so Java is losing badly everywhere. Pure Java libraries are never best in class anymore (they once sometimes were), which is how you end up with situations like this:

https://blogs.oracle.com/developers/post/open-sourcing-jiphe...

> We’ve chosen to base our products on OpenSSL because it is the most open and most widely used cryptographic toolkit on the planet. At Oracle, we make extensive use of the OpenSSL 3.0 FIPS 140 provider to operate in regulated markets. We like the OpenSSL FIPS provider so much we decided to build a Java cryptography toolkit on top of it called Jipher. By converging on a single toolkit (OpenSSL) we reduce our attack surface, simplify security patching, achieve assembly-optimized performance, and help our customers meet regulatory compliance requirements.

It means the first use of Panama in the wild is to replace the built in memory safe Java SSL stack with OpenSSL, a giant pile of C with a long history of memory safety vulns, and it's Oracle itself doing this because OpenSSL is "the most widely used" library and nothing else matters. They even say replacing Java SSL with OpenSSL will reduce the attack surface.

If even the well funded OpenJDK developers working in Java can't outcompete the poorly funded OpenSSL devs working in an unproductive language, then what chance do other Java library devs have? None at all! Native code will always win because it will be faster and have a bigger community, and in the end there's safety in numbers.

This is very sad. It means Java's future is as a collection of thin wrappers around bug-prone C APIs accessed via Panama, which, as you are well aware pron, will make Loom virtually useless as it cannot work with native code by design.

A long steady decline is the most likely path here, in which Java libs get hollowed out to try and keep up with the functionality and performance of native libs (e.g. http/3), and so Java devs steadily lose the benefits of the JVM. There are things Java could do to avoid this fate but the OpenJDK people are never going to do them.