well in openejb we use a newer version (to be compatible with some other
lib) so we have the issue, we can still fork all handlers but...

- Romain


2012/8/15 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>

> Hmm, maybe that's the reason why I saw mem leaks after updating to a newer
> javassist version?
>
> For now I think it's good for just remaining with the old javassist
> version and get rid of javassist in the next OWB release completely ;)
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 4:31 PM
> > Subject: OWB and finalize filtering
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > with javassist it is important to filter finalize method (it is a jira
> if i
> > remember) however i don't get the way we do it:
> >
> >         if (method.getName() == FINALIZE &&   // Method.getName() is
> > defined to return .intern() in the VM spec.
> >             method.getParameterTypes().length == 0 &&
> >             method.getReturnType() == Void.TYPE)
> >         {
> >             // we should NOT invoke the bean's finalize() from proxied
> >             // finalize() method since JVM will invoke it directly.
> >             // OWB-366
> >             return null;
> >         }
> >
> > using javassist 3.15 i got weird stuff. It looked finalize() was
> redirected
> > to _d2finalize (not sure why).
> >
> > i updated locally OWB to use on the ProxyFactory (in
> JavassistProxyFactory):
> >
> > fact.setFilter(new MethodFilter() { // TODO if relevant: create
> > FinalizerMethodFilter singleton + intern usage for method name
> >             public boolean isHandled(Method method)
> >             {
> >                 return !(method.getName().equals("finalize")
> > &&
> > method.getParameterTypes().length == 0 &&
> >                             method.getReturnType() == Void.TYPE);
> >             }
> >         });
> >
> >
> > and i didn't see the errors anymore :)
> >
> > now the question ;): any reason we are not filtering this way?
> >
> > btw i could dump bytecode before/after if needed
> >
> > - Romain
> >
>

Reply via email to