Parameter reflection: duplicate parameter names

Alex Buckley alex.buckley at
Mon Feb 11 11:45:12 PST 2013

I have suggested to Eric McCorkle that the javadoc for 
Executable.getParameters should set expectations for clients by saying:

"The parameters of the underlying executable do not necessarily have 
unique names, or names that are legal identifiers in the Java 
programming language (JLS 3.8)."


On 2/1/2013 12:13 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> Agreed. So shouldn't there be a mention that implementers should not
> assume parameter names are unique? For example, what you said could
> easily be attached to the spec to make that clear.
> Paul
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Alex Buckley <alex.buckley at
> <mailto:alex.buckley at>> wrote:
>     Core reflection has always exposed what ever is in the class file,
>     which may always have been generated by a non-Java compiler.
>     Especially for a new reflective construct which we want non-Java
>     compilers to use, it is futile to try to constrain core reflection
>     to hide content which is not Java-compliant, or throw exceptions for it.
>     Alex
>     On 2/1/2013 11:47 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
>         I know parameter names are irrelevant to the JVM, but the spec
>         doesn't
>         explain how this poor situation will be handled. Should it at
>         least be
>         mention it's expected for all names to be unique? Or leave the
>         behavior
>         undefined? It might matter to the implementator -- especially if a
>         HashMap<> could be used internally to store the names.
>         Paul

More information about the enhanced-metadata-spec-discuss mailing list