On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 05:53:34 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> These null strings make me wish we had an assert with no strings if one >> isn't provided. I suppose the "precond" string isn't much better. I don't >> like null strings - it seems like you want to say why you're asserting this >> condition or what it means, ie take the opportunity to provide a bit more >> documentation. Like here you could say that monitorenter is only preempted >> when the top frame is interpreted or runtime (which is coming from the >> compiler right?), which I suppose is redundant with the condition. I >> suppose nothing is better than "sanity" or "should be". I retract my >> suggestion to use precond though. Others might believe it's better but I'm >> agnostic. > > So is it a compiled frame otherwise? Reporting the unexpected frame type > might be useful. I added a check for compiled or native. If we want to check all possibilities we could add a method in frame class to return the name of the frame type. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27802#discussion_r2475342971
