On 10/18/15 10:45 AM, joe darcy wrote:
On 10/17/2015 10:10 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
(I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style, but
neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start
On Oct 18, 2015, at 1:49 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
> * Invokedynamic (like invokeinterface and invokevirtual) does not like calls
> with null as receiver
:-) Jochen, you are one of the few people on the planet who was around JSR 292
when this *was* true.
A very early draft of indy piggy-ba
Sure. For what’s it worth, this is for all practical purposes Dynalink, in the
form I’ve been developing for years as a standalone library on GitHub and
presenting about it at JVM Language Summits over several years, so I’d expect a
significant amount of awareness is there.
The primary motivat
On 10/17/2015 06:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 10/10/15 6:55 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
There is an issue with LinkedHashMap (resp LinkedHashSet),
it inherits from HashMap /facepalm/, and static methods are
accessible through class inheritance /facepalm/.
So if LinkedHashMap doesn't declare som
On 10/17/2015 10:10 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 10/17/2015 05:46 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
(I view calling an "inherited" class static method to be poor coding style, but
neither javac nor NetBeans warns about it.)
That surely can be fixed. Should we start a feature request?
I believe
java
> On Oct 18, 2015, at 10:49 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
> On 17.10.2015 13:30, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>> This looks very, very promising. Would it help to get the language
>> maintainers of the most popular scripting/dynamic JVM languages involved
>> ASAP? Happy to contact Groovy, Clojure, S
On 10/18/2015 09:49 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> * Invokedynamic (like invokeinterface and invokevirtual) does not like
> calls with null as receiver, quitting the call right away with a NPE.
> But languages may allow for calls on null. That again means some kind of
> dummy receiver is required
On 17.10.2015 13:30, Martijn Verburg wrote:
This looks very, very promising. Would it help to get the language
maintainers of the most popular scripting/dynamic JVM languages involved
ASAP? Happy to contact Groovy, Clojure, Scala, JRuby folks (although I
suspect many of them are on this list).
