Based partly on our discussions at the Summit about "live constants", and also
based on the likely requirements of Project Lambda, the JSR 292 EG is likely to
allow any single invokedynamic instruction to pass one or more extra constant
values into the bootstrap method invocation.
Here is the c
Le 22/10/2010 10:43, John Rose a écrit :
> Based partly on our discussions at the Summit about "live constants", and
> also based on the likely requirements of Project Lambda, the JSR 292 EG is
> likely to allow any single invokedynamic instruction to pass one or more
> extra constant values i
On Oct 22, 2010, at 2:19 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> And also:
>
> CallSite myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodType type);
> CallSite myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodType type,
> Object arg);
> CallSite myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodTy
The JSR 292 EG is discussing access rules for method handles.
The draft spec. say that CONSTANT_MethodHandles in the constant pool, and
dynamically looked up method handles, are accessible to related nested classes:
* In general, the conditions under which a method handle may be
* crea
* John Rose [2010-10-22 08:43] writes:
> MethodHandle myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodType type);
> MethodHandle myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodType type,
> Object arg);
> MethodHandle myBSM(MethodHandles.Lookup look, String name, MethodType type,
>
On Oct 22, 2010, at 4:03 AM, Helmut Eller wrote:
> Why is the name a required and not an optional argument?
The name is part of the fixed structure of CONSTANT_InvokeDynamic, which is
modeled on CONSTANT_Methodref, and therefore contains a CONSTANT_NameAndType.
Whether you want the name or not
Le 22/10/2010 12:34, John Rose a écrit :
> The JSR 292 EG is discussing access rules for method handles.
>
> The draft spec. say that CONSTANT_MethodHandles in the constant pool, and
> dynamically looked up method handles, are accessible to related nested
> classes:
>
> * In general, the co
???
FYI..
Thanks,
JD
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:09 PM, wrote:
> The results of your email command are provided below. Attached is your
> original message.
>
> - Results:
>Ignoring non-text/plain MIME parts
>
> - Unprocessed:
>I am a software engineer from Mumbai with special interests
