RFR: 8329581: Java launcher no longer prints a stack trace [v10]

[Sonia Zaldana Calles]

On Thu, 9 May 2024 19:52:12 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles <szaldana at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi folks, 
>> 
>> This PR aims to fix [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581). 
>> 
>> I think the regression got introduced in [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458). 
>> 
>> In the issue linked above, [LauncherHelper#getMainType](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16461/files#diff-108a3a3e3c2d108c8c7f19ea498f641413b7c9239ecd2975a6c27d904c2ba226) got removed to simplify launcher code.
>> 
>> Previously, we used ```getMainType``` to do the appropriate main method invocation in ```JavaMain```. However, we currently attempt to do all types of main method invocations at the same time [here](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.base/share/native/libjli/java.c#L623). 
>> 
>> Note how all of these invocations clear the exception reported with [CHECK_EXCEPTION_FAIL](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/140f56718bbbfc31bb0c39255c68568fad285a1f/src/java.base/share/native/libjli/java.c#L390). 
>> 
>> Therefore, if a legitimate exception comes up during one of these invocations, it does not get reported. 
>> 
>> I propose reintroducing ```LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking forward to your suggestions. 
>> 
>> Cheers, 
>> Sonia
>
> Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Decreasing diff size addressing unnecessary changes

Hi all,  

I think there's some consensus that we need some follow up cleanup issues for the JNI spec, renaming constants, fixing return codes, etc. 

Seeing how that grows the scope of the issue quite a bit, I'd like to push this patch and track the other issues brought up separately. 

If there are no objections about the current state, I'd like to integrate some time next week. Let me know your thoughts.

cc: @jaikiran, @AlanBateman

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18786#issuecomment-2142383991