Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 21:50, Jeroen Frijters wrote: > > David Lichteblau wrote: > > > BTW, on the topic of VM* classes: Has there been agreement on > > > java.lang.VMClass? The proposal was to make its methods > static (and > > > possibly add an "Object vmdata" field to java.lang.Class instead). > > > > I don't think anybody objected to this proposal. I'd > definitely would > > like the vmdata field though. > > I would like the vmdata field type then to be VMClass not Object.
IIRC you are the only one to voice this request. I would like it to be of type Object and I think Jikes RVM as well. > So if I remember the discussion correctly the idea then is to not call > the methods on the VMClass object but on static VMClass methods. Do > these methods then get as parameter the Class object itself or the > vmdata object? We would pass the Class instance, that way people who don't want to use the vmdata instance, can do so. > And more importantly, who wants to prototype this so we can > have a real discussion about implementation issues? I'll see if I can find the time tomorrow. Regards, Jeroen _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
