Automatic Resource Management, V.2

[Rémi Forax]

Neal Gafter a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Joshua Bloch <jjb at google.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Yes, this is the situation that Bruce Chapman pointed out earlier.  As a
>> practical matter, I suspect that resources will have rather simple types,
>> but still the spec does have to cover this situation.  If you have a good
>> solution, feel free to share.  Otherwise, hang on, and we'll see what we can
>> come up with.
>>
>>     
>
> In the LocalVariableTypeTable, conjunctive types should be simple to add.
> Recursive types can be handled by introducing backreferences.
>
> You can probably avoid this mess by being explicit about the specification
> rather than attempting the "as-if" rewriting.  If a construct like this is
> to be integrated into the JLS that would probably be required anyway, and a
> new set of issues is likely to be exposed by the attempt.  It would be
> better to get the specification wrung out earlier rather than later (I don't
> think Alex will be eager to do it himself).
>
>   
Why the local var need to be visible in these tables ?

The compiler already introduced new local var , by example, in case of 
++/-- and
compound assignments on boxed type (using the hidden instruction LetExpr).
In that case the local var is flagged SYNTHETIC and doesn't appear in 
local vars tables.

Rémi