Review Request JDK-8186050: StackFrame should provide the method signature

[mandy chung]

Hi Peter,

Updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk10/webrevs/8186050/webrev.03/

On 9/3/17 7:02 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
>
>> Updated webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk10/webrevs/8186050/webrev.02/
>
> That's what I had in mind, yes.
>
> Looking at the method names, I have a second thought about the too 
> general StackFrame::getDescriptor(). Not looking at the javadocs, one 
> could ask: "what is a descriptor of a stack frame?". I don't know, 
> maybe getMethodDescriptor() would be more to the point or even 
> getMethodTypeDescriptor() (since it is a descriptor of method 
> parameter and return types, not containing method name). What do you 
> and others think?

Descriptor is specified in JVMS 4.3:
     A /descriptor/ is a string representing the type of a field or method.

I initially had getMethodDescriptor() while "Method" is kinda redundant 
since StackFrame represents a method invocation. Descriptor in this 
context is for a method and never be a field. Hence I like Remi's 
suggestion to rename it to getDescriptor.
>
> Although it is not expected for StackFrame interface to be implemented 
> by custom classes, it is a public interface. I have seen 3rd party 
> code implementing JDK interface that was not meant to be implemented 
> by custom classes just because the interface seemed appropriate. To 
> keep binary compatibility with such potential implementations, those 
> two new methods could be default methods throwing UOE.
>
Having a second thought, while it's rarely to have custom StackFrame 
implementation, I agree making the new methods to be default method that 
would help migration for tests or other use.
> nit: while you are at it, you could remove the redundant "static" 
> modifier from the StackWalker.StackFrame interface declaration.
>

Done

Mandy