This is the mail archive of the java-patches@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: PING: Reflection doesn't work across interfaces


>>>>> "Bryce" == Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay@redhat.com> writes:

Bryce> I think it would be better to just have the compiler put the interface
Bryce> method's index in the meth->index field here, rather than have the
Bryce> runtime do fixups on a hypothetical vtable offset. How does the patch
Bryce> below look? Otherwise, your patch looks fine to me. Obviously the
Bryce> invocation code has become a bit of a mess and could really use some
Bryce> refactoring, for example to clearly separate the lookup and argument
Bryce> prep/execution stages, but this looks ok for now.

This sounds reasonable to me.  Andrew would have to approve the patch
though.  Wouldn't we also need (or at least want) to fill in this
field at runtime for those interfaces laid out then?

Tom


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