Second line of class_alloc_new_object asserts
'!hythread_is_suspend_enabled()'. So, yes, we can assume the condition.
The line to add is something like
'assert(struct_Class_to_java_lang_Class());' to remove it in release.
WBR,
Pavel.
On 3/12/07, Weldon Washburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Looking at just the procedure named, class_alloc_new_object(), the assert
definitely looks wrong. However, I think the patch ignores the intent of
the assert. I think the developer intended to somehow assert that the
input
arg, a ptr to struct Class, is valid. In other words the original intent
is
to do something like:
assert(c);
ManagedObject** hjlc = c->get_class_handle();
assert(hjlc);
ManagedObject* jlc = *hjlc;
assert(jlc != NULL);
assert(jlc->vt());
assert(jlc->vt()->clss ==
VM_Global_State::loader_env->JavaLangClass_Class);
assert(java_lang_Class_to_struct_Class(jlc) == clss); // else clss's
java.lang.Class had a bad "back" pointer
Note that I stole all the above code from the existing function called,
ManagedObject *struct_Class_to_java_lang_Class(Class *clss) {...}
Rather than cut/paste the body of struct_Class_to_java_lang_Class into
class_alloc_new_object(), how about simply calling
struct_Class_to_java_lang_Class()? The only unknown is if we can assume
the condition assert(!hythread_is_suspend_enabled() ); will be OK from
the
body of class_alloc_new_object(). Thoughts?
--
Weldon Washburn
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
--
Pavel Pervov,
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
