You are awesome, Chris! /M
> On 10 Jun 2015, at 19:31, Chris Newland <cnewl...@chrisnewland.com> wrote: > > Thank you Sundar, that explains it perfectly. > > JITWatch visualises JavaScript/bytecode/asm correctly with -ot=false on > JDK9. I'll now try and make it work with optimistic typing enabled. > > Cheers, > > Chris > @chriswhocodes > > On Wed, June 10, 2015 05:22, A. Sundararajan wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> Filed a bug to track for future reference: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8087102 >> >> >> Actually, this is not a bug. Two things: >> >> >> 1) --compile-only / -co option is no longer mandatory to use >> --debug-dump-dir option/ >> 2) optimistic types is off by default in jdk8u and it is on by default >> with jdk9. >> >> With optimistic types, code generation is lazier & optimistic -- code is >> generated/re-generated as you run the code. With jdk9, you can either >> >> 1) Turn off optimistic types with jdk9 (using -ot=false option) and dump >> similar code as in jdk8u 2) or run the code (i.e., remove -co / >> --compile-only option) and get >> all generated (and regenerated) code dumped. >> >> PS. I've resolved the bug as "not an issue". >> >> >> Hope this explains, >> -Sundar >> >> >> On Wednesday 10 June 2015 02:55 AM, Chris Newland wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> Has Nashorn's behaviour for dumping bytecode changed in JDK9? >>> >>> >>> Given this JavaScript: >>> https://gist.github.com/chriswhocodes/bfe139592adb846967d8 >>> >>> >>> Executed using >>> $JAVA_HOME/bin/jjs -co --dump-debug-dir=. run.js >>> >>> >>> Under 8u60b18 the bytecode is produced as expected: >>> >>> >>> https://gist.github.com/chriswhocodes/e3a85c3613b084e45356 >>> >>> >>> This visualises correctly in JITWatch[1] and the bytecode maps back to >>> the source as expected. >>> >>> But under 9b67 only a small amount of bytecode is output that doesn't >>> represent the source program: >>> >>> https://gist.github.com/chriswhocodes/c6c6e33e7994c98d4975 >>> >>> >>> The correct program output is produced under both executions so I don't >>> think the difference is down to dead code elimination. >>> >>> Possible regression? >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> >>> Chris >>> @chriswhocodes >>> >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/AdoptOpenJDK/jitwatch >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
