>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben> Also, curious to know - what about out-of-band verifiers? So, for Ben> example, I verify something on my PC, sign it as verified, then run it Ben> on a Palm, with no verification? My understanding was that there is a new kind of "split verification", where a pre-verifier (or the compiler itself) emits type tables as attributes in the bytecode. These type tables make verification much more efficient, as all the special 'jsr' handling and type merging stuff can just go away. I haven't heard whether there is a defined way to sign bytecode to avoid the need for any kind of verification. I don't think there's any deep reason that verification needs to be done in an explicit way. For instance, hypothetically you could have a VM that looks up a class' byte[] representation in a database of known-valid classes, and then only does the full verification if it is not seen. (This is not completely trivial due to class loading oddities, but it could be done by deferring some kinds of type checking, as gcj does.) Tom
