[PATCH] 4851444: Exposing sun.reflect.Reflection#getCallerClass as a public API in Java 8

[Peter Levart]

On 09/20/2013 10:57 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Am 20.09.2013 09:28, schrieb Nick Williams:
> [...]
>> This is all well and good, but some of us just need a simple array. 
>> This seems like over-engineering. I just want an array of 
>> StackFrameInfos/StackTraceFrames.
>
> if you need the full stack, then misusing a Predicate and a dummy 
> Consumer to collect everything looks a lot like not intended use. The 
> intended inability of lambdas to write to local variables outside the 
> lambda is not helping here to avoid anonymous inner classes. So what 
> was a simple method call, will look really awful - I agree.

List<StackFrameInfo> frames = new ArrayList<>();
Thread.walkStack(frames::add);

No so awfull.

Regards, Peter

> But if you would have designed the API that uses the information now, 
> rather than fitting the old API from the frame work and the new API 
> here together, then this problem would most probably not have 
> appeared, since the structure would have been very different from the 
> beginning.
>
>>> I have modified java.util.logging.LogRecord to infer the caller 
>>> using the new API (much simpler):
>>>
>>>     StackTraceElement frame =
>>>         Thread.firstCaller(e -> {return 
>>> !isLoggerImplFrame(e.getClassName()); },
>>>                            StackFrameInfo::stackTraceElement);
>>>
>>> Replacement for getCallerClass()
>>>     Class<?> c = Thread.getCaller(StackFrameInfo::getDeclaringClass);
>>>
>>> Replacement for traversing the stack with getCallerClass(int depth)
>>>     Thread.walkStack(e -> doSomething(e));
>>
>> This looks beautiful for Java 8, sure. Now try doing these same 
>> things in a library compiled for Java 6 but made to be compatible 
>> with Java 8 and so all of this has to happen via reflection. Suddenly 
>> it's nightmarish.
>
> With a new class to contain the information it will look like a 
> nightmare even if you get an array and do not have that callback 
> style. What we will probably do is a kind of plugin that gets enabled 
> if jdk8 is used. That class will have to be compiled using jdk8 
> though. And in case of an older jdk the old implementation will be used
>
> bye Jochen
>
>