On 1/16/15 3:32 PM, John Rose wrote:
On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:03 PM, Coleen Phillimore
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
I was sort of wondering about this along the same lines. You're
setting the second bit, right? :)
That sounds good, much better than the string prefix hack.
Parsing the string would introduce too much coupling between the JVM
and random details of the JDK.
I also suggested to Serguei that redefinition of patched classes is
not going to happen, since they are not user-visible. So all of the
"EMCP" logic can punt on pseudo-strings, one way or another, if it
needs to.
BTW, since patched classes are always anonymous classes, you can't
even get to them, unless you dig them out some private place like a
lambda form.
Anonymous classes can be noticed by agents with the CL or CFLH events.
Then nothing stops agents from redefining or re-transforming anonymous
classes.
Reconstitution is also a lost cause, since the patches will be
dropped, but I see how that might be something you might possibly run
into, as a stress test or some sort of debugger display.
I've filed a new bug to track this issue as we early agreed with Coleen:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069233
Fill free to update it if necessary.
Thanks,
Serguei
— John
