Hi Alan, hi Sergei,
i see two issues with this patch,
the first one is that before that change, ClassFileTransformer was a functional 
interface, it's not a functional interface anymore, so it will break code
(note that ClassFileTransformer is not annotated with @FunctionalInterface so 
it's a kind of 'legal' non backward compatible change)
the second one is more problematic, currently, the API allows me to have access 
to the ClassLoader even if there is a SecurityManager installed,
with the new method "transform" I have not access (at least easily*) to the 
ClassLoader without fearing a potential SecurityException,
i think this should be fixed by sending the module *and* the classloader to 
transform.

Rémi
* there is still a nasty way to get the classloader without getting the 
security exception but i let that to an astute reader.




----- Mail original -----
> De: "serguei spitsyn" <serguei.spit...@oracle.com>
> À: "Alan Bateman" <alan.bate...@oracle.com>, "jigsaw-dev" 
> <jigsaw-dev@openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Lundi 29 Février 2016 19:29:28
> Objet: Re: Round #3: RFR: 8147467 - Add ClassFileTransformer transform        
> method that provide the Module to the agent
> 
> On 2/29/16 04:29, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > On 29/02/2016 08:32, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
> >> :
> >>>
> >>> Please, review the fix for:
> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147467
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jdk webrev:
> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2016/jdk/8147467-Jigsaw-agents.jdk3/
> >>>
> > This looks good and I can get this into the jake/jdk repo for you.
> 
> Thanks, Alan!
> 
> >
> > I think the javadoc will need a few additional edits but I can look
> > after these. In particular, the links to the transform method need to
> > be updated as it's the new transform method that is invoked. In
> > addition I think we can make the class description of
> > ClassFileTransformer a bit clearer.
> 
> Sure, some correction of the javadoc is needed to make it clearer.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Serguei
> 
> 
> >
> > -Alan.
> 
> 

Reply via email to