Hi all,
There is a new iteration of the implementation at:
[1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/webrev.10
[2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/javadoc.10
main changes in this iteration: we have added additional tests to
improve code coverage.
Thanks,
Vicente
Hi all,
I have uploaded another iteration of the implementation of the constants
API + the javadoc.
Thanks for the comments so far,
Vicente
[1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/webrev.09
[2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/javadoc.09
On 05/24/2018 09:09 PM,
Thanks for the comments so far, I have uploaded another iteration of the
implementation + javadoc
Vicente
[1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/webrev.08
[2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/constant.api/javadoc.08
On 05/23/2018 02:41 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
Hi all,
Plea
EnumDesc and VarHandleDesc, those should be static inner classes of
respectively Enum and VarHandle,
they are not part of the main API but nice addons.
After some thought, I am inclined to agree. Here's the rationale. There
are some built in constant types; they have Desc counterparts in JL
Thanks for the review and the great comments!
This version is far better than the previous one,
... or the previous seven :)
MethodHandleDesc.Kind: The JVMS defines names for these constants, why using
different names here ?
Mostly for readability of client code. Happy to consider altern
This is the terminology used by the JVMS (JVMS 4.3.2). Since these
things model classfile entities, we adopted the JVMS terminology.
On 5/24/2018 1:32 AM, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
I think using FieldTypeDescriptor is misleading. since that is used for
param types and return types.
I propose SimpleT
Hi Vincente,
the following files do not have the copyright header:
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/FieldTypeDescriptor.java
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodTypeDescriptor.java
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/TypeDescriptor.java
In the following files
Hi all,
I've not taken a look to the code, so this is just my comments based on the
javadoc.
This version is far better than the previous one, given that all my other
comments are "you should change that too ..., i don't like ..., etc", i want to
first say that i'm very please by this new versi
I think using FieldTypeDescriptor is misleading. since that is used for
param types and return types.
I propose SimpleTypeDescriptor or VariableTypeDescriptor.
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:11 PM, Vicente Romero
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please review the proposed implementation for JEP 334 [1]. The web
