RFR 8144931: Assert class signatures are correct and refer to valid classes

[Paul Sandoz]

Hi Uwe

Not a stupid question.

We took the conservative approach to preserve the existing costs (avoid linkage and string generation).

Paul.

> On 18 Feb 2016, at 14:54, Uwe Schindler <uschindler at apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> just a stupid question from somebody outside the OpenJDK developers:
> You are already using ASM to generate the class files. Why not also use the Type class in ASM to generate the signatures of a class constant?:
> 
> Instead of:
> 
> static final String  LF_HIDDEN_SIG = className("Ljava/lang/invoke/LambdaForm$Hidden;");
> 
> Use the following to define the constant:
> 
> import jdk.internal.org.objectweb.asm.Type;
> import java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm.Hidden;
> static final String  LF_HIDDEN_SIG = Type.getDescriptor(Hidden.class);
> 
> This is compile-time checked, because of the .class notation.
> 
> Thanks,
> Uwe
> 
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> uschindler at apache.org
> ASF Member, Apache Lucene PMC / Committer
> Bremen, Germany
> http://lucene.apache.org/
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On
>> Behalf Of shilpi.rastogi at oracle.com
>> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 12:18 PM
>> To: Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com>; core-libs-
>> dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Subject: Re: RFR 8144931: Assert class signatures are correct and refer to valid
>> classes
>> 
>> Thank You Vladimir!
>> 
>> I have done the changes. Please review the updated patch-
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8144931/webrev.02/
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Shilpi
>> 
>> On 2/18/2016 1:58 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>> Shilpi,
>>> 
>>> _CLASS suffix looks redundant and you can abbreviate LAMBDA_FORM to
>> LF:
>>>  LF_HIDDEN_SIG
>>>  LF_COMPILED_SIG
>>>  FORCEINLINE_SIG
>>>  DONTINLINE_SIG
>>> 
>>> Otherwise, looks fine.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>> 
>>> On 2/17/16 5:47 PM, shilpi rastogi wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> 
>>>> Please review fix for the following bug-
>>>> 
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144931
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8144931/webrev.01/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shilpi
>