On 16.04.2018 21:38, Remi Forax wrote:
the support of version 54.0 and only one sentence in section 4.7.25, see 

that is the only change in bytecode? There have been enough flags in the bytecode the JVM just ignores, that could have been done here as well - or do I overlook something important?

Anyway, thanks for the pointer, very appreciated.

ASM related question: if Java now releases so much more often and is much more often changing the bytecode version, wouldn't it be an option to optionally disable the bytecode version check? Even if that means to fail strangely in another place? I don't think a java9 based class reader would have had problems with this bytecode. Might be this is a special case of course and might be the next 10 cases are too severe for this, you know surely better than I do. Its just a thought

bye Jochen

Reply via email to