Re: RFR: 8035063: Option handling in sjavac needs to be rewritten

Hi, On 2014-03-19, Andreas Lundblad wrote: > Hi compiler-dev + build-dev, > > Please review the fix for JDK-8035063 and JDK-8037085 which involves changes > to sjavac (option handling) and dev/ + dev/jdk build files. > > > Description: > > - Sjavac relied on passing around the main arg array

Re: RFR: 8009719: core reflection should get type annotation data from the VM lazily

Erik, Joe, Robert, Thanks for the reviews, just pushed this to TL cheers /Joel

Re: RFR: 8009719: core reflection should get type annotation data from the VM lazily

Hi all, Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8009719/webrev.02/ Adds Field.c to make/java/java/FILES_c.gmk (old build) Renames parameter in Field.c from method to field Thanks for the suggestions/fixes! cheers /Joel On 2013-09-21, Joel Borggren-Franck wrote: > Hi > >

Re: RFR: 8009719: core reflection should get type annotation data from the VM lazily

Hi, On 2013-09-22, Robert Lougher wrote: > Hi, > > Not a reviewer, but in Field.c the parameter to > getTypeAnnotationBytes0 is a field not a method. > Thanks, will rename that parameter before pushing. cheers /Joel

RFR: 8009719: core reflection should get type annotation data from the VM lazily

Hi A while ago [1] I introduced an extra field in to j.l.r.Method, j.l.r.Constructor, and j.l.r.Field in order to support reflection for type annotations. These fields were intended to be removed later, they were there to make the coordination between VM and libraries easier when implementing refl