Thanks! On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Toby Reyelts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) It might be worth considering Tamplin's suggestion to extend the scope > instead of dropping it altogether. > I thought about that, but it seemed kind of a rats nest, considering the garbage-in factor. You could end up with more than one variable in the same slot at the same time, or potentially confuse a debugger if the runtime type of the object in the slot was incompatible with the declared type of that slot. It seemed most conservative to just drop them. > 2) It kind of sucks that there is no validation that goes along with this, > e.g. in CheckClassAdapter > We don't actually use CheckClassAdapter, so it won't affect us directly. I'll leave it to the ASM guys to decide on the best way to fix this in their code base. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
