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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Symbol table resolution


Andrew Haley wrote:
Properly enforcing access rules in libgcj causes problems in that
compiler-generated code sometimes wants to access private methods.
Presumably, this is only because GCJ doesn't generate accessor methods correctly? [*]

If so, the issue should go away when we switch to the ecj front-end. Is it worth putting in this hack now for something that really shouldn't occur?

Also, won't this still break existing binaries? We'd need to bump the ABI version and only enable the check for new binaries.

If we want to keep the direct private calls & field accesses as an ABI optimization, then we could instead check that the class being accessed is a nested or enclosing class (ie, check for compliance with the JLS rules rather than the JVMS rules).

Bryce

[*] http://gcc.gnu.org/PR19870


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