No, I can't. I also get the ICCE at the x.hail() invocation...:
MacBook-Pro-Ati:j2sdk-image aszegedi$ bin/javac -Xbootclasspath/p:jre/
lib/rt.jar -source 1.7 Hello.java
MacBook-Pro-Ati:j2sdk-image aszegedi$ bin/java -Xbootclasspath/p:jre/
lib/rt.jar Hello
MacBook-Pro-Ati:j2sdk-image aszegedi$ bin/java -Xbootclasspath/p:jre/
lib/rt.jar -XX:+EnableMethodHandles Hello
Hello, world (from a statically linked call site)
Hello, world
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IncompatibleClassChangeError
at Hello.main(Hello.java:11)
Attila.
On 2009.04.23., at 9:57, hlovatt wrote:
>
> Attila - can you run the example?
>
> On Apr 23, 5:31 pm, Attila Szegedi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Nope, the OpenJDK builds are 32-bit, i.e. this command in the MLVM
>> jre/
>> bin directory:
>>
>> MacBook-Pro-Ati:bin aszegedi$ lipo -info java
>> Non-fat file: java is architecture: i386
>>
>> "i386" means 32 bit. In contrast, running lipo -info on the Apple-
>> shipped 1.6.0 java (which is 64-bit) gives "x86_64":
>>
>> MacBook-Pro-Ati:bin aszegedi$ lipo -info /System/Library/Frameworks/
>> JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.6.0/Commands/java
>> Non-fat file: /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/
>> 1.6.0/Commands/java is architecture: x86_64
>>
>> So, that MLVM build is definitely 32-bit.
>>
>> Attila.
>>
>> On 2009.04.23., at 4:00, hlovatt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi John,
>>
>>> Thanks for your reply:
>>
>>> On Apr 23, 11:05 am, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> The ICCE is the generic error for a bytecode-level configuration
>>>> problem. Are you running a 64-bit JVM? There is no 64-bit support
>>>> yet (help?!) and you'll get an ICCE like the one you report.
>>
>>> I assume the Mac builds are 64 bit, the other Mac VMs are. So that
>>> is
>>> probably the problem.
>>
>>>> I need to update the mlvm repo with (a) the results of the push
>>>> that
>>>> just went into the JVM and (b) my latest hackings on the java.dyn
>>>> and
>>>> sun.dyn classes. Please stay tuned.
>>
>>> It may not be a problem for me, I am more interested in the strongly
>>> typed direct call which seems to be working fine. I am wanting to
>>> get
>>> multiple dispatch running using method handles rather than a
>>> dispatcher object which I currently use.
>>
>>>> This pain you feel is reserved for the prestigious group called the
>>>> Early Adopters!
>>
>>> No need to apologise, it is great that you make the code available
>>> early in the development cycle.
>>
>>> -- Howard.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
