> JNI worked it just wasnt as ergonomic as it could have been - which was on purpose

There's a reason they're calling it the 'FFM' API and not JNI v2. The API devs were correct in rethinking the approach to native interop.

This just proves my point; being crappy ON PURPOSE is why it's a dead end; it's very difficult to improve something that's been deliberately designed badly.

Besides that, no Java dev in their right mind is going to continue to use JNI once they upgrade to Java 22 and realise FFM exists.