On Fri, 5 May 2023 14:57:27 GMT, Daniel Jeliński <djelin...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> FWIW, this is what dumpbin displays for these entries: > > ``` > 1 2 0000351C addAccessibilityEventNotification = > ?addAccessibilityEventNotification@WinAccessBridge@@QEAAX_J@Z (public: void > __cdecl WinAccessBridge::addAccessibilityEventNotification(__int64)) > 2 4 00003628 addJavaEventNotification = > ?addJavaEventNotification@WinAccessBridge@@QEAAX_J@Z (public: void __cdecl > WinAccessBridge::addJavaEventNotification(__int64)) > 3 42 00006D94 removeAccessibilityEventNotification = > ?removeAccessibilityEventNotification@WinAccessBridge@@QEAAX_J@Z (public: > void __cdecl WinAccessBridge::removeAccessibilityEventNotification(__int64)) > 4 44 00006EA0 removeJavaEventNotification = > ?removeJavaEventNotification@WinAccessBridge@@QEAAX_J@Z (public: void __cdecl > WinAccessBridge::removeJavaEventNotification(__int64)) > ``` > > There's no way to get a pointer to an instance of `WinAccessBridge` using the > supported interface, and calling these methods with garbage value for `this` > would likely crash. Dear lord, the Microsoft linker is truly cursed, through and through @prrace What sort of testing would need to be done for such a change? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13734#issuecomment-1536396606
