Remi,
Yes, one reason is resolution peculiarities of exception class not
located on boot classpath.
The other reason is enabling extensive sharing of lambda forms.
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
On 2/21/14 4:33 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
> Hi Valdimir,
> is there a reason to generate
> try {
> ...
> } catch(Throwable t) {
> if (Klass.isInstance(t)) {
> ...
> }
> throw t;
> }
> instead of:
> try {
> ...
> } catch(Klass t) {
> ...
> }
>
> maybe because the Klass can be resolved by the wrong classloader ?
>
> Rémi
>
> On 02/21/2014 12:59 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Paul, thanks!
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 2/21/14 2:11 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 6:57 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Paul,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback! See my answers inline.
>>>>
>>>> Updated webrev:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8027827/final/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> I finally figured out how to make caching work. This webrev contains these
>>>> changes.
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>> I changed LF representation a bit and added 2 auxiliary method handles -
>>>> argument boxing and wrapping into Object[] and result unboxing. These
>>>> operations depend on actual type and can't be shared among arbitrary
>>>> combinators with the same basic type. They are used only during LF
>>>> interpretation and are completely ignored in compiled LFs.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> src/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandleImpl.java
>>>>>
>>>>> 634 // t_{i+2}:L=ValueConversions.unbox(t_{i+1}) OR
>>>>> ValueConversions.identity(t_{i+1})
>>>>> 635 if (type.returnType().isPrimitive()) {
>>>>> 636 names[UNBOX_RESULT] = new
>>>>> Name(ValueConversions.unbox(type.returnType()),
>>>>> 637 names[TRY_CATCH]);
>>>>> 638 } else {
>>>>> 639 names[UNBOX_RESULT] = new
>>>>> Name(ValueConversions.identity(),
>>>>> 640 names[TRY_CATCH]);
>>>>> 641 }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You could create the form without the identity transform for the
>>>>> non-primitive case?
>>>>>
>>>>> final int UNBOX_RESULT = type.returnType().isPrimitive() ?
>>>>> nameCursor++ : 0;
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> if (UNBOX_RESULT > 0) { ...
>>>>> names[UNBOX_RESULT] = new
>>>>> Name(ValueConversions.unbox(type.returnType()), names[TRY_CATCH]);
>>>>> }
>>>> I can, but it complicates matching and compiling the pattern in
>>>> InvokerBytecodeGenerator. I decided to keep the shape uniform for all
>>>> cases.
>>>>
>>> Ah, yes i see now, the code is simpler being kept uniform.
>>>
>>> Paul.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mlvm-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> mlvm-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
