forwarded to amber-spec-experts Rémi
----- Mail transféré ----- De: "mandy chung" <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> À: "amber-dev" <amber-...@openjdk.java.net> Envoyé: Mercredi 9 Décembre 2020 05:00:03 Objet: Should final fields in records be trusted or not trusted in 16? I need your help, amber experts, in understanding the conclusion on the amber-spec-experts discussion [1]. It isn't clear to me what it's agreed to do in Java SE 16. Remi raised in PR for JDK-8257596 [2] and so your clarification would help. PR #1706 intends to fix the regression introduced by JDK-8255342 that removes non-specified JVM checks on classes with RecordComponents attributes. This does not conflict with the work to implement the true TNSFF for all classes like JDK-8233873. One way I read [1] is that it's agreed to revisit the current approach [3] that makes final fields in record classes "read-only" by reflection and JIT optimization to trust final fields in records (note that JIT optimization is implementation-specific). Instead all final field values should be trusted as a constant (see JDK-8233873). If this is the agreement, I see two options for JDK 16: 1. Keep JDK-8247444 and fix the regression as proposed by PR #1706 [2] 2. Backout JDK-8247444 [4]. This involves spec change and we shall act on it quickly. Making all final field values trusted as a constant will be a separate enhancement regardless of which option it goes. Please clarify. Mandy [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/2020-November/002630.html [2] https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1706 [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8247444 [4] https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/compare/master...mlchung:backout-8247444
