Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-12 Thread Karen Kinnear
I need to do many more additional examples offline. I appreciate your trying to make overriding of forwarders simpler for the jvm. I would like to continue to explore the option having the jvm do the calculation of overriding both direct and indirect forwarders until we’ve worked more examples.

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-12 Thread Brian Goetz
A VM perspective: *invocation* *dynamic receiver* *resolution* *NOT invoked* *selection:* *actual execution* invokevirtual D::m(LDT) D D.m(LDT) D.m(LDT) invokevirtual D::m(LDT) E D.m(LDT) E.m(LDT) reverser: adapt

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-12 Thread Brian Goetz
This leads us to the next question, given that you can only override "locally" a forwarder, what if a forwarder overrides a forwarder ? You throw a LinkageError ? Yes, this could arise from inconsistent separate compilation (I thought I covered this in my doc?)  Best choice is probably to

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-12 Thread Remi Forax
- Mail original - > De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "Karen Kinnear" > Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Vendredi 12 Avril 2019 01:04:15 > Objet: Re: Updated VM-bridges document > On 4/11/2019 5:18 PM, Karen Kinnear wrote: >>> >&

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-11 Thread Brian Goetz
On 4/11/2019 5:18 PM, Karen Kinnear wrote: OK, so at this point, the classfiles that have been loaded look like:     class D {     void m(LDT) { real method }     @Forwarding(m(LDT)) abstract void m(Date);     }     class E extends D {     @Override     m(Date) { impl }    

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-11 Thread Karen Kinnear
> On Apr 10, 2019, at 5:22 PM, Brian Goetz wrote: > > OK, so in the old world, D has m(Date). > > > Now, D has m(LDT), with a forwarder from m(Date) -> m(LDT), with some sort of > metadata stapled somewhere to effect the Date <--> LDT conversions. > >> class E extends D { m(Date); }

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-11 Thread Remi Forax
> De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 21:52:23 > Objet: Re: Updated VM-bridges document > This was received through a side channel: >> From: [ mailto:sebastian.sickelm...@gmx.de | sebastian.sickelm...@gmx.de ] &g

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-11 Thread Brian Goetz
This was received through a side channel: From: sebastian.sickelm...@gmx.de Subject: Re: Updated VM-bridges document Hi, i have a question regarding the discussed forwarding schema for fields. Should it be possible to forward field access to methods, so that we can safely remove public fields

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-09 Thread forax
> De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "Remi Forax" > Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Mardi 9 Avril 2019 15:39:19 > Objet: Re: Updated VM-bridges document >>> OK, I see what you’re getting at now. Yes, this is one of the implementation >>&g

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-09 Thread Brian Goetz
> OK, I see what you’re getting at now. Yes, this is one of the implementation > possibilities. I was mostly looking to validate the concepts before diving > into the representational details. One key point is that the default case > should be able to proceed with no bootstrap; a small set

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-09 Thread forax
> De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "Remi Forax" > Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Lundi 8 Avril 2019 20:39:03 > Objet: Re: Updated VM-bridges document > OK, I see what you’re getting at now. Yes, this is one of the implementation > possibili

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-08 Thread Brian Goetz
the result when overridden by legacy subclasses. > On Apr 8, 2019, at 1:18 PM, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote: > > > > De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "Remi Forax" > Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Lundi 8 Avril 2019 16:24:21 > Objet: Re: Updated VM

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-08 Thread forax
> De: "Brian Goetz" > À: "Remi Forax" > Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Lundi 8 Avril 2019 16:24:21 > Objet: Re: Updated VM-bridges document >> The other thing is that Forwarding bridge should not use an adapter but a >> bootst

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-08 Thread Brian Goetz
> > The other thing is that Forwarding bridge should not use an adapter but a > bootstrap method. Can you explain exactly what you mean here? Because in my mind, the adapter _is_ a bootstrap method — it is code to which the VM upcalls at preparation / link time to help establish linkage.

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-07 Thread Brian Goetz
dy proposed that we should support a bootstrap method > that returns a MethodHandle instead of a CallSite, this is exactly what we > need here. > > regards, > Rémi > > - Mail original - >> De: "Brian Goetz" >> À: "valhalla-spec-experts&

Re: Updated VM-bridges document

2019-04-07 Thread Remi Forax
gt; À: "valhalla-spec-experts" > Envoyé: Jeudi 4 Avril 2019 14:33:39 > Objet: Updated VM-bridges document > At the BUR meeting, we discussed reshuffling the dependency graph to do > forwarding+reversing bridges earlier, which has the effect of taking some > pressur