On Sep 16, 5:08 am, Jeroen Frijters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attila Szegedi wrote:
> > On Sep 16, 2008, at 3:15 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
> > > How is everyone handling the filtering of synthetic/bridge methods?
>
> [...]
>
> > Most interesting, especially considering that bridge methods are really
> > only ever needed for parametric types, and there's not a single type
> > parameter in StringBuilder...
>
> I think that in this case the bridge is inserted because
> AbstractStringBuilder isn't public.
>
> I'm still trying to figure out how to recognize these methods... On (not very
> appealing) idea is to look at the target method that the bridge is calling,
> if it has the same signature you can probably assume that it is an "access"
> bridge (in contrast with a "variance" bridge).
Do you mean by bytecode inspection? I guess that would mean a
resounding 'no' to:
>>> Is there a reliable way to deduce the 'real' method set via reflection?
Rich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
