Using javap, I believe that the JavaScript type test
does not mean that the resultant Java type is this class. The generated Java type invokes the script code in its constructor; this will not result in exposing addNumbers
as a Java method.
>javap -classpath . test
public class test extends org.mozilla.javascript.NativeFunction implements org.m
ozilla.javascript.Script{
public test(org.mozilla.javascript.Scriptable, org.mozilla.javascript.Contex
t, int);
public test();
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
public final java.lang.Object exec(org.mozilla.javascript.Context, org.mozil
la.javascript.Scriptable);
public final java.lang.Object call(org.mozilla.javascript.Context, org.mozil
la.javascript.Scriptable, org.mozilla.javascript.Scriptable, java.lang.Object[])
;
public int getLanguageVersion();
public java.lang.String getFunctionName();
public int getParamCount();
public int getParamAndVarCount();
public java.lang.String getParamOrVarName(int);
public java.lang.String getEncodedSource();
public boolean getParamOrVarConst(int);
}
Reading between the lines, I'd say you need to map to Java types to do what you want. From the jsc doc:
-implements java-intf-name
Specifies that a java class
implementing the Java interface
java-intf-name
should be generated
from the incoming JavaScript source
file. Each global function in the
source file is made a method of the
generated class, implementing any
methods in the interface by the same
name.
Define this interface:
//Adder.java
public interface Adder {
public int addNumbers(int a, int b);
}
Write this implementation:
//AdderImpl.js
function addNumbers(a, b) {
return a+b;
}
Compile the JavaScript with the arguments -implements Adder AdderImpl.js
. Invoke the method like so:
Adder adder = new AdderImpl();
int n = adder.addNumbers(1, 2);
System.out.println(n);
I'd hazard a guess that it was probably necessary to do it this way because of differences in the languages' type systems.
I used Rhino 1.7R2. For the sake of brevity, I've avoided using packages, etc.