On Fri, 5 May 2023 15:04:36 GMT, Julian Waters <jwat...@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? @azuev-java and @kumarabhi006 can help with review and testing of this PR. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13734#issuecomment-1536570955
