C++/Java: Don't use type size in object allocation

[Bryce McKinlay]

Per Bothner wrote:

> Bryce McKinlay wrote:
>
>> Currently, calls to the Java object allocation routines (eg 
>> _Jv_AllocObject) pass both a class parameter and a size parameter. 
>> Hard coding the size parameter at the call site contradicts binary 
>> compatibility, since the size of the object being created may change 
>> at runtime. Even without binary compatibility, passing the size 
>> parameter is redundant because the size of the type can be trivially 
>> obtained from class metadata.
>
>
> I think the reason was so _Jv_AllocObject could also be used to allocate
> arrays.  As long as arrays no longer use _Jv_AllocObject, it's fine to
> remove the size perhaps.


Right, array allocation uses a different set of calls: 
_Jv_New{...}Array. The only other case where size matters is for String 
objects where the char array is inlined into the String, but we have 
_Jv_AllocString() for those.

Regards

Bryce.