To make the diagram easier to use, I have added a legend
that explains its various notations.
On Mar 13, 2019, at 8:44 PM, John Rose wrote:
>
> In the following explanations you may with to consult this diagram of
> constant pool relations, which is derived from my current draft:
>
> http://cr.
Yes from me to all your points here.
A conditional child segment doesn’t need any new holes, just there BSM based
predicate you mention. This works equally well for conditional fields, methods,
and nested types.
Conditional supers seem to require some special pleading with DefaultType to
car
>
> (What's an optional member of a template? Ah, that's a good
> conversation. I haven't written this one up yet. I think the cleanest
> way to formulate those is in terms of *optional child segments*.
> I can think of many different ways to gate their optionality,
> and BSM-based instantiatio
This is going to be a fun conversation. As you know, I've been quietly
hammering on a new version of templates for weeks and have (re-)discovered
a number of hard problems, plus some solutions. Thanks so much for
making a close reading of the previous draft; your questions are greatly
improving t
Some quick answers…
> Where in the template class file are holes allowed? "almost anywhere in the
> constant pool”
The constant pool is divided into “segments”, and the holes are a property of
the segment. In the original doc, the constraint was that the holes were the
first N constants in
John,
Lois and I have been studying the Template Classes in the VM proposal:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/values/template-classes.html
We had some questions we were hoping you could either answer in email or in the
next draft.
thanks,
Karen
Where in the template class file are holes allowe
