----- Mail original -----
> De: "Brian Goetz" <[email protected]>
> À: "Remi Forax" <[email protected]>, "amber-spec-experts"
> <[email protected]>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 11 Octobre 2019 22:57:23
> Objet: Re: Record attribute binary format
> No need. Varargs-ness is reified with the (mandated) canonical ctor.
hum, this looks like a hack, it means you can not just read the Record
attribute, you have to crawle all the methods to find the primary constructor.
and if we take a look to the past, we have added access flags to methods,
fields and classes, so there is a non negligible chance that we will want to do
the same to record components in the future.
Rémi
>
> On 10/11/2019 4:43 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
>> It seems we have to add an access_flag for each record component because we
>> have
>> to mark if the record component is a varargs or not.
>>
>> So the format should be
>>
>> Record_attribute {
>> u2 attribute_name_index;
>> u4 attribute_length;
>> u2 number_of_record_components;
>> { u2 component_access_flags;
>> u2 component_name_index;
>> u2 component_descriptor_index;
>> u2 attribute_count;
>> attribute_info attributes[attributes_count];
>> }
>> }
>>
>> with the component_access_flags allowing ACC_VARARGS.
>>
> > Rémi
