Per> Hm. If someone "manually" generates a .class containing two methods
Per> 'int foo()' and 'double foo()' and also contains calls to those methods,
Per> is that something we should support? I'd have to look carefully in
Per> the vm spec to see what it says, and also see what jdk does. But
Per> even if it turns out to a technically valid classfile, it's clearly
Per> not important to support it.
I believe it is valid to have this in a .class file.
I think it is probably not important to support this for CNI. But, it
is important that we be able to correctly compile and execute this
code. ISTR that code like this can be generated by the 'nice'
compiler (I've CCd the author for his comments).