Attendees: Remi, Simms, Fred, DanH, Tobi, Brian, John
- Brian: So I do owe a write up specialization, coming soon
- DanH: Can both .ref and .val classes use `withfield` ?
- Brian so this relates to a discussion on field protection:
- Is it just the class itself or nest ?
- Remi: so records, do we need more accessibility
- DanH: so value type records vs non-value type record, we don't want
different rules
- Brian: previously wanted lang features like `x with { y.z = 3 }`
- ...but don't know what that is in bytecode
- DanH: seem like we should start restrictive
- Brian: yeah, like only construction of inline types
- Brian: current translation:
- inline type: Fields and Constructor (Static Factory)
- ref type: Methods
- Brian: Assume John leans towards access boundary of the nest
- John: yes, simpler same set of rules for all
- Otherwise nest need bridges and feels like a mess
- Wouldn't like to see more complexity (we've made that mistake
before)
- EG ML: "access control for withfield bytecode, compared to
putfield" [1]
- Brian: Previous discussion `InlineObject` and `IdentityObject`
- Do we need both ? Can we drop one ?
- DanH: so didn't we want this for template specialization ?
- Brian: identity might the one we care for...
- EG ML: "IdentityObject and InlineObject" [2]
- John: Amber record default methods...
- ...ClassValue: EG ML "ClassValue performance model and
Record::toString" [3]
- DanH: will have to check with JIT folks
- Brian: further questions on SoV ?
- DanH: `instanceof` with Q-type, could be optimized
- Fred: special case for `null`, then the name is resolved
- John: can we look into changing that in the spec...
- "null checks vs. class resolution, and translation strategy
for casts"
- EG ML "null checks vs. class resolution, and translation
strategy for casts" [4]
References:
-
[https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001261.html](https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001261.html)
-
[https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001258.html](https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001258.html)
-
[https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001260.html](https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001260.html)
-
[https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001259.html](https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/2020-April/001259.html)
