Rémi Forax schrieb: [...] > You can also try the backport, > source code is here : > http://code.google.com/p/jvm-language-runtime/source/browse/#svn/trunk/invokedynamic-backport > compile with ant > and run it (with jdk5+) like this : > > java -javaagent:lib/jsr292-backport.jar MyMainClass > > It retro-weaves 1.7 compatible classes to run on jdk5+ VM.
nice, but didn't John Rose kind of say such agents are purely evil? Well, doesn't matter atm. What I wanted to test is how the stack is shown if a call goes through a MethodHandle. That is for things like Class.forName(String) for example. The backport won't help here if it is normal java, since I then know that it will add additional stack frame layers, that will influence what Class.forName will choose. > Currently you have to compile against latest classes found > in mlvm repo but I suppose I can provide a jar with empty skeletons > just to compile. > > All method handle adapters are implemented but some of them > doesn't run at full speed (especially permute/spread/collect). > > I've just commited changes to enable bound object to be JITed. > (a more convoluted patch than I want :) I think I should very soon have a very intense look at your code ;) bye Jochen -- Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou The Groovy Project Tech Lead (http://groovy.codehaus.org) http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
