Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-26 Thread Christian Thalinger
On Sep 19, 2013, at 9:57 AM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: Recommended changes made: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.04/ Looks good. Thanks for using ASM. Test with jtreg (for pass and for induced failure) on MacOS, not sure what additional other

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-26 Thread John Rose
On Sep 19, 2013, at 9:57 AM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: Recommended changes made: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.04/ Good; reviewed. Consider adding this tweak, which would close the loop on alternation between the fooError and fooException versions: +

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-19 Thread David Chase
Recommended changes made: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.04/ Test with jtreg (for pass and for induced failure) on MacOS, not sure what additional other testing is desired since it is entirely in the libraries. I included code to handle the case of a broken

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread David Chase
New webrev, commented line removed: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.03/ On 2013-09-12, at 1:53 PM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: I believe it produced extraneous output -- it was not clear to me that it was either necessary or useful to fully describe all the

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread Christian Thalinger
+ // err.initCause(ex); Why is this commented? -- Chris On Sep 6, 2013, at 4:59 PM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: new, improved webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.02/ Same small changes to the sources, plus a test. bug: wrong exception was

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread David Chase
I believe it produced extraneous output -- it was not clear to me that it was either necessary or useful to fully describe all the converted exceptions that lead to the defined exception being thrown. The commented line should have just been removed (I think). On 2013-09-12, at 1:24 PM,

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread David Chase
The test is adapted from the test in the bug report. The headline on the bug report is wrong -- because it uses reflection in the test to do the invocation, the thrown exception is wrapped with InvocationTargetException, which is completely correct. HOWEVER, the exception inside the wrapper is

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread Christian Thalinger
On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:28 AM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: New webrev, commented line removed: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drchase/8022701/webrev.03/ I think the change is good given that the tests work now. Is your test derived from the test in the bug report? And it would

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread John Rose
It looks good. I have three requests. Regarding this comment: + * See MethodSupplier.java to see how to produce these bytes. + * They encode that class, except that method m is private, not public. The recipe is incomplete, since it does not say which bits to tweak to make m private.

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread David Chase
Do these sibling bugs have numbers? And I take it you would like to see 1) a test enhanced with ASM to do all 3 variants of this 2) DO attach the underlying cause David On 2013-09-12, at 5:35 PM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com wrote: It looks good. I have three requests. Regarding this

Re: RFR(S+M) / 8022701 Accessibility checking: InvocationTargetException is thrown instead of IllegalAccessError

2013-09-12 Thread John Rose
On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:44 PM, David Chase david.r.ch...@oracle.com wrote: Do these sibling bugs have numbers? Yes, 8022701. I just updated the bug to explain their common genesis. And I take it you would like to see 1) a test enhanced with ASM to do all 3 variants of this Yes, please.