RFR - JDK-8218650: LineNumberTable records for method invocations with arguments

[Vicente Romero]

On 2/19/19 8:27 PM, Eddie Aftandilian wrote:
> Hi Vicente,
>
> Thanks for the reply.  Can I ask why you don't think the LNT should 
> contain entries for accesses to fields?  It seems that results in 
> incorrect line numbers in certain cases.  For example, consider the 
> following code:
>
> 1: class LineNumbers {
> 2:
> 3:   static class T {
> 4:     boolean b;
> 5:   }
> 6:
> 7:   static void doIt(boolean... values) {}
> 8:
> 9:   public static void main(String[] args) {
> 10:     T a = new T();
> 11:     T b = null;
> 12:
> 13:     doIt(
> 14:         a.b,
> 15:         b.b);
> 16:   }
> 17: }
>
> $ javac LineNumbers.java
> $ java LineNumbers
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException
> at LineNumbers.main(LineNumbers.java:13)
>
> I would expect the exception to be at line 15, not 13.

having the exception at 13 is plain bad or good enough? It seems to me 
that you want to do some automation based on the exact line where the 
exception was produced. I'm just worried that generating LNT entries for 
every expression would produce, probably unnecessarily, fluffier class 
files.

>
> Thanks,
> Eddie

Thanks,
Vicente

>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:46 PM Vicente Romero 
> <vicente.romero at oracle.com <mailto:vicente.romero at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Eddie,
>
>     Thanks for the patch. But first I'm not sure that there is a bug
>     in the
>     LNT. There is an entry in the LNT, I'm talking about the example
>     at [1],
>     for the invocation of method `id`. What we need to understand is
>     why the
>     stack trace is not referring to that line and is referring to line
>     12.
>     In any case I don't think that the LNT should contain entries for
>     accesses to fields.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Vicente
>
>     [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218650
>
>     On 2/15/19 8:37 PM, Eddie Aftandilian wrote:
>     > Hi,
>     >
>     > I have attached a patch for JDK-8218650, in which there are missing
>     > line number table entries for field accesses. This is my first
>     attempt
>     > to contribute to OpenJDK, so I'm happy to take feedback. Please see
>     > the attached patch.
>     >
>     > Bug report: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218650
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Eddie Aftandilian
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20190220/af89fd80/attachment.html>