Arrin,

Yeah. That makes sense. Why teh [EMAIL PROTECTED] did they have to change it?

Thing is, I covered the case of no LVT, just not incomplete LVT.
And it's messy in there.

Bitch, bitch, bitch.

Thank you very much.

-Bil



Hi Bil

My understanding is that the Local Variable Table is an optional inclusion with a method.

A method does not need to have a Local Varible Table, If it does have a LVT I am not sure whether or not it is required to be correct.

I don't know the specifics of your project but it might be worthwhile considering the possibility that some code will not have a local variable table at all or if it is the information in the local variable table is incorrect.

org.apache.bcel.generic.Type has a couple of static methods which convert either type signatures to a Type object or a method signature to an array of Types. (see getType(String) and getArgumentTypes(String)) these mean you don't have to manually parse the method signature.

Hope this helps

Bye Arrin

Bil Lewis wrote:

Hi all.

I've just been trying to update my code to run on code compiled under 1.5.
Almost everything works flawlessly. Just this one thing...

For code like this:

static void startTarget(Class clazz) { // Only called from event thread.
       final Class clazzz = clazz;

       new TestInnerClass() {
           public void run() {
               Class c = clazzz;
           }
       };
   }

where the variable clazzz must be passed to the inner class TestInnerClass$1, the 1.5 compiler does not include it in the LVT, unlike 1.4. Here's the constructor in question:


TestInnerClass$1(java.lang.Class);
 Signature: (Ljava/lang/Class;)V
 Code:
  0:    aload_0
  1:    aload_1
  2:    putfield    #11; //Field val$clazzz:Ljava/lang/Class;
  5:    aload_0
  6:    invokespecial    #14; //Method TestInnerClass."<init>":()V
  9:    return

 LineNumberTable:
  line 1: 0
  line 10: 5
 LocalVariableTable:
  Start  Length  Slot  Name   Signature
  0      10      0    this       LTestInnerClass$1;

As is clear, the parameter in register 1 is not in the LVT. As near as I've been able to make out, the only way to find out that it even exists is to parse the string in the signature. This
seems like an exceedingly awkward thing to do.

Ideas?

-Bil



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to