Hi Florian, Thanks for the comments,
On 2013-08-26, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 08/26/2013 02:39 PM, Joel Borggren-Franck wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Please review doc fix and test for > >http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=5047859 > > > >http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/5047859/webrev.00/ > > > >This is a spec change to update the spec to match the long-standing > >implementation. > > Perhaps use {@code length} instead of 'length'? I agree, will fix. > Technically, I > don't think the length field exists at all. The Java language just > happens to use field syntax to represent the arraylength opcode. > But adding some clarification to the documentation certainly doesn't > hurt. > The language spec (JLS $10.7) is very clear that there is a length member for array types, and that it is public, final and a field. I don't think most vm's implement it as a field, but that shouldn't matter. So while I agree this is clarifying it is actually a "bug fix" as well. cheers /Joel
