On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:21:26 GMT, Jorn Vernee <[email protected]> wrote:
> Improve the specification of `Linker.Option.firstVariadicArg`, by specifying
> more clearly which index values are valid.
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/Linker.java line 650:
> 648: * function descriptor associated with a downcall
> linkage request}
> 649: * <p>
> 650: * The {@code index} value must be greater than zero, and less
> than or equal to the number of argument layouts
Why > 0 and not >= 0? If the list of argument layout is empty, wouldn't the
first vararg be in position 0? E.g. a call to a function `m(...)` with _no_
actual arguments?
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/Linker.java line 652:
> 650: * The {@code index} value must be greater than zero, and less
> than or equal to the number of argument layouts
> 651: * of the function descriptor that is used in the same linkage
> request as this option. When the {@code index} is
> 652: * equal to the number of argument layouts in the descriptor, it
> indicates a variadic function to which zero
This sentence is not clear. If index == num layouts then it means *all*
arguments are variadic?
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/Linker.java line 659:
> 657: * against which the index is validated is available.
> 658: *
> 659: * @param index the index of the first variadic argument layout
> in the function descriptor associated
IMHO this description is still confusing because it speaks about an index into
the function descriptor argument layouts - which this thing is not.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14565#discussion_r1235980081
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14565#discussion_r1235981064
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14565#discussion_r1235981781
