Okay. Again, sorry for my absence. This wraps up my feedback for now. I now await responses from Mandy.
On Sep 17, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: > On 9/17/13 10:32 AM, cowwoc wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Has this been any new progress on this thread? >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2013-September/thread.html#20480 >> > > I have sent my feedback a couple weeks ago on this proposed patch but haven't > heard back from Nick. > > You asked at a good time. I discussed this with John Rose last couple days > on this topic. He has been thinking about how to do fillInStackTrace > performantly and walk the stack with laziness and frame filtering. The > current implementation fills the entire stack trace while Groovy and Log4j > use case filters the frames of some specific classes until it reaches the > first one not being filtered. > > He suggests to consider an API taking a callback shape (e.g. Function, > Consumer, etc) that Remi Forax suggested at one time that allows the JVM to > do something. I will work with John to work out the details and determine > the interface between VM and library and hash out issues. > > I like the callback shape idea and hope to work out a proposal soon. > >> I'd like to second Jörn concerns that shipping JDK8 (less than a month to >> go!) without a fix would be extremely problematic. The performance impact >> would be huge and the difficulty of introducing a change would be far more >> difficult than doing it before JDK8 is out. >> >> How do we go about moving this forward? >> > > This RFE is target for JDK 8 and my priority to get that in. I'm well aware > the impact to Groovy and Log4j and some other existing applications that are > seeking for a replacement of Reflection.getCallerClass. > > Mandy > > >
