Re: Symbol table resolution

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > >  > 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? [*]
 > >
 > > No, it's nothing to do with accessor methods.
 > >
 > > It's purely for optimization: sometimes the compiler generates calls
 > > to private methods for things like Class.forName().  We need to make
 > > these methods private for security reasons, but the compiler needs to
 > > generate calls to them.
 > >   
 > Oh, of course - I forgot about those. In that case, wouldn't it be 
 > easier (and cleaner) just to maintain a list of these "special" methods 
 > in the linker that compiler-generated code is allowed to call?

I thought about that.  It won't work, because there's no way to
distinguish between a call inserted by the compiler and a rogue app
trying to call those private methods.  You really need to know.

Andrew.