RFR: 8004699 : Add type annotation storage to Constructor, Field and Method (original) (raw)

Joel Borggrén-Franck joel.franck at oracle.com
Tue Dec 18 09:47:03 UTC 2012

On 12/18/2012 02:58 AM, David Holmes wrote:

On 18/12/2012 3:06 AM, Joel Borggrén-Franck wrote:

On Dec 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Peter Levart<peter.levart at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Joel,

82 // This is set by the vm at Method creation 83 private byte[] typeannotations;

Wouldn't it be better to initialize this field in the constructor? You could create an overloaded constructor if you wanted to be compatible with previous versions of the VM. Fields aren't created using a constructor as far as I can see. Correct, all the reflection objects are allocated directly by the VM and initialized field by field as needed. No Java level constructor involved. This change is also fine with me, on the proviso that the follow up change to deal with efficiency and the field name is not too far away. Though really I don't think the change of name will be that big a deal anyway.

Thanks for the review David.

I expect to continue working on this (up to) and after M6 and fix issues like the space overhead.

You are right in that just renaming the fields is a couple of lines in HotSpot and a 3 lines in JDK. However I am not comfortable doing that rename without running all the tests again and that takes close to 24 hours and involves a lot of manual steps (until vm and jdk changes sync up and I can automate the testing). This close to M6 and with a rewrite coming anyway I would rather spend that time on writing the parser for these byte arrays :)

cheers /Joel

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list