[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BCEL-248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14703577#comment-14703577
]
Mark Roberts commented on BCEL-248:
-----------------------------------
That only works if we replace the code in StackMap with the code in
StackMapTableEntry - which I am currently modifying as part of BCEL-202.
So to recap:
- we delete StackMapEntry
- we replace the body of StackMap with the body of StackMapTableEntry.
Note that this still breaks BC and is very confusing as StackMap =>
StackMapTable and StackMapEntry => StackMap
I now think my rename suggestion was a bad idea. It would be nice to be
consistent, but it's confusing. With my revised proposal there are two choices:
break BC and tell clients that
StackMap => StackMapTable
StackMapEntry => StackMapTableEntry
Or probably (?) break BC and copy the code from
StackMapTable to StackMap
StackMapTableEntry to StackMapEntry
I assume you would prefer the later?
> StackMapEntry should be removed
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: BCEL-248
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BCEL-248
> Project: Commons BCEL
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Mark Roberts
>
> StackMapTableEntry is a much better implementation of the same object as
> StackMapEntry. The later should be removed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
