On Thu, 30 May 2024 07:14:13 GMT, Alan Bateman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Okay. I still think that should be hidden behind the >> `java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance` as it is an implementation detail the >> JVMTI and thread code shouldn't need to know about IMO. Once the alternative >> implementation is removed I expect these explicit checks for >> `BaseVirtualThread` will need to be reverted and we could avoid that if we >> make a change now. > > java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance returning true when the top is not an > instance of that class would be a bit strange. > java_lang_Thread::is_virtual_thread_instance might be less surprising. Yes you are right, we would need a new API to answer the generic "are you a virtual thread" query. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19405#discussion_r1620123058
