RFR: 6983726: Reimplement MethodHandleProxies.asInterfaceInstance [v12]

[Chen Liang]

On Tue, 2 May 2023 21:22:16 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> As John Rose has pointed out in this issue, the current j.l.r.Proxy based implementation of MethodHandleProxies.asInterface has a few issues:
>> 1. Exposes too much information via Proxy supertype (and WrapperInstance interface)
>> 2. Does not allow future expansion to support SAM[^1] abstract classes
>> 3. Slow (in fact, very slow)
>> 
>> This patch addresses all 3 problems:
>> 1. It implements proxies with one hidden class for each requested interface and replaced WrapperInstance inheritance with a check to the class data. This can avoid unexpected passing of `instanceof`, and avoids the nasty problem of exporting a JDK interface to a dynamic module to ensure access.
>> 2. This patch obtains already generated classes from a ClassValue by the requested interface type; the ClassValue can later be updated to compute implementation generation for abstract classes as well.
>> 3. This patch's generated hidden classes has call performance on par with those of lambda expressions; the creation performance is slightly less than that of LambdaMetafactory: https://jmh.morethan.io/?gist=fcb946d83ee4ac7386901795ca49b224
>> 
>> Additionally, an obsolete `ProxyForMethodHandle` test was removed, for it's no longer applicable. Tests in `jdk/java/lang/invoke` and `jdk/java/lang/reflect` pass.
>> 
>> [^1]: single abstract method
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Minor cleanup, attempt to migrate lookup validation blocked by security manager

Also, looking at #10024, should the proxy classes generated have stable names, such as by incorporating the name of the interface in the module/package name?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13197#issuecomment-1533665503