On 10/12/19 7:32 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
On 12/10/2019 22:17, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
BTW, Should java.lang.Class have a method
getCanonicalRecordConstructor() ?
This would be helpful, as the serialization use case already shows us
that people would want to infer the signature of the canonical
descriptor from the accessors return types. Which is doable, but a bit
tedious to do. I was also worried, if we drop the 'isVarargs' from the
component about how a client might reconstruct vararg-ness of the
constructor. In the reflective lookup that's not too important, after
all the runtime type of the components is the same, regardless of
varargs) - but for source reflection this might be more important to
reconstruct correctly - so I think it would be nice to have an
official 'link' between the record/class and its canonical
constructor, both in core reflection, and source reflection.
we should add all these issues to our next meeting agenda tomorrow
Maurizio
BTW2, if in the future we need some access flags on record
components, we can still add a new attribute like MethodParameters on
the Record attribute, so the current binary format is Ok.
Vicente
