Hi, all
I found that IBM VME's kernel class implementation don't fully support
generics related reflection, more specifically, the methods below always
return null: (Oli? would you like to confirm?)
j.l.r.Constructor.getGenericParameterTypes()
j.l.r.Constructor.getGenericExceptionTypes()
j.l.r.Field.getGenericType()
j.l.r.Method.getGenericReturnType()
j.l.r.Method.getGenericParameterTypes()
j.l.r.Method.getGenericExceptionTypes()
java.lang.Class.GetGenericInterfaces()
java.lang.Class.GetGenericSuperclass()
So I looked at DRLVM's j.l.r.Constructor implementation, seems most
codes related generics reflection are VM neutral, such as classes in
o.a.h.l.r.parser, except several small native methods locate in
o.a.h.v.VMGenericsAndAnnotations to access class flags, I haven't looked
into other classes but I won't be surprised if they aren't in similar
case. If so, it makes sense to me to extract the VM independent part
into class library codes as utilities, so that IBM VME(and other Harmony
compatible VM) can also benefit from them, one obvious drawback may be
some new VMI methods needed to access the VM implementation details.
Because lack of enough knowledge on either IBM VME or DRLVM
implementation, I'm not sure if it is a good idea. So any comments from
DRL gurus and others?
--
Paulex Yang
China Software Development Lab
IBM
