RFR (L) 8037210: Get rid of char-based descriptions 'J' of basic types

[John Rose]

On Apr 3, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Christian Thalinger <christian.thalinger at oracle.com> wrote:

> Of course they are popular because these are the type names.  There is no type L; it’s an object.  I don’t understand why we have to use different names just because they are used in other namespaces.  This is not a C define.

They stand for JVM signatures as well as basic types.  The letters are signature letters.  Can we move on from this?

— John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mlvm-dev/attachments/20140404/a5b38d8f/attachment.html>