From: Alexandre Oliva (oliva@dcc.unicamp.br)
Date: Sun Dec 13 1998 - 13:00:38 EST
On Dec 13, 1998, Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 12, 1998, Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > I would have thought that simply changing finalize0 to have package
>> > access might have fixed the access problem, why a new header file?
>>
>> Package access would be fine, but we'd be wasting one more method
>> invocation. It could have been made private, but then the Java
>> compiler would create an artificial method with package access for the
>> inner class to invoke, and I thought it would be nicer to get rid of
>> it. But I'm facing some trouble with `$' in identifiers; perhaps we
>> should make Thread.Finalizer a top-level class instead of an inner
>> class, so as to avoid the `$'... What do you think?
> I checked in what I think.
It does not look like you're open for discussion, but I'll assume you
didn't mean it.
Since we're trying to optimize things, I thought we could save two
method invocations here, and having an additional header file doesn't
look like an expensive price for that to me.
> I'm aware that Sun does some trickery (i.e., create a package access
> method), but hey, given that Kaffe currently does even check public,
> private, etc., don't you think we could live with that for a while?
The point is not about checking, the point is that any Java-compliant
compiler *will* generate the additional wrapper method, and will
invoke it instead of the one you intended to invoke directly. Go
figure it out like I did.
> We'd save one header file, one class file, and a lot of confusion.
I agree with the confusion introduced by dollars in identifiers, but I
don't think the additional class or header files are an issue.
I'll make another try with a top-level class, to avoid the `$'s.
Next time, if you find some problem, please don't just undo the
changes without discussion (or even silently, like you did a few days
ago :-(, this doesn't improve cooperation at all; you can easily check
out the previous version and use it while we discuss an issue.
> I think that at some point, Sun will solve the problems with inner
> classes somehow, and then we'll have to implement their solution anyway.
I don't think there's anything to solve here.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:14 EDT