Hello,
I'm out of the office Dec 24 2010 through Jan 9 2011.
Please refer to David Cox (david.cox) and Daniel Källander (daniel.kallander).
Regards,
Henrik Österdahl
___
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
* Rémi Forax [2011-01-06 13:30] writes:
that is essentially a constant butexp must be evaluated at load time
and not later (as would be done with lazy linking).
why not using a static final field initialized in clinit in that case ?
Because final static fields can't be optimized as well as
On 01/06/2011 04:08 PM, Helmut Eller wrote:
* Rémi Forax [2011-01-06 13:30] writes:
that is essentially a constant butexp must be evaluated at load time
and not later (as would be done with lazy linking).
why not using a static final field initialized inclinit in that case ?
Because final
My goal was to do the port at the byte code level so that there would be a
high degree of confidence
that the 500K of existing code will work as it does today. It is a stack
based VM so changing the arg
order could add some pain for me (another thing I try to avoid). Since I
am not calling
On Jan 6, 2011, at 1:12 AM, Helmut Eller wrote:
* John Rose [2011-01-06 02:37] writes:
Live constants are definitely one of the use cases that
invokedynamic is designed for.
Are/will there be any means to link invokedynamic call sites eagerly
instead of the lazy linking scheme?
E.g.
On Jan 6, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Mark Roos wrote:
My goal was to do the port at the byte code level so that there would be a
high degree of confidence
that the 500K of existing code will work as it does today. It is a stack
based VM so changing the arg
order could add some pain for me
On 01/06/2011 08:23 PM, John Rose wrote:
On Jan 6, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Mark Roos wrote:
My goal was to do the port at the byte code level so that there would
be a high degree of confidence
that the 500K of existing code will work as it does today. It is a
stack based VM so changing the arg
