This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: bug in static initialization

To: "Anthony Green" <green at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: bug in static initialization
From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
Date: 04 Sep 2001 15:35:15 -0600
Cc: "Per Bothner" <per at bothner dot com>, "Java Discuss List" <java at gcc dot gnu dot org>
References: <873d62q33l.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <m2u1yirhc6.fsf@eureka.bothner.com> <00d201c1356e$e818d220$5be6b4cd@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: tromey at redhat dot com

>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Green <green@redhat.com> writes:

>> I probably broke this, and hopefullt fixed it with my September 1
>> "PATCH to maybe_yank_clinit".  (I'll verify this after I re-build.)  I
>> can check it in, but I'd prefer Alex to take a look first, as I don't
>> know the reasons for the old logic.

Anthony> I don't think so.  I had this patch applied to my tree when I
Anthony> created the test case for this bug.

Your test case shows a different bug with a similar symptom (throws
NullPointerException).  Once I fixed that bug, I still got an exception,
hence this report.  However the two bugs are actually different.

Tom

References:
- bug in static initialization
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: bug in static initialization
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: bug in static initialization
  - From: Anthony Green

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]