> As discussed on the mailing list
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter, so it will be converted to an
> internal API.
>
>
On Tue, 7 May 2024 15:30:25 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> As discussed on the mailing list
>> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
>> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
>> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter,
On Tue, 7 May 2024 05:41:27 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> As discussed on the mailing list
>> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
>> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
>> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter,
> As discussed on the mailing list
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter, so it will be converted to an
> internal API.
>
>
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 14:43:36 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> As discussed on the mailing list
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter, so
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 14:43:36 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> As discussed on the mailing list
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
> BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used
> by internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter, so
As discussed on the mailing list
https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/classfile-api-dev/2023-June/000381.html,
BufWriter::asByteBuffer has a behavior not suitable for API and is only used by
internal StackMapGenerator/StackCounter, so it will be converted to an internal
API.
Somehow the
