RFR 8233272 : The Class.forName specification should be updated to match the long-standing implementation with respect to class linking
david.holmes at oracle.com
Fri Nov 15 00:12:31 UTC 2019
On 15/11/2019 9:58 am, Brent Christian wrote:
> On 11/14/19 8:22 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> On 11/13/19 10:37 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
>> The spec change looks fine.
> OK, thanks.
+1 from me on spec changes.
>> As for the test, I expect that it simply calls
>> Class.forName("Provider", false, ucl) and then should succeed.
>> Then calling Class.forName("Provider", true, ucl) should fail with an
>> error (I think it's EIIE with NCDFE?). This way it verifies that
>> initialization/linking does cause NCDFE during verification while
>> Class.forName does not do linking if initialize=false.
> Yes, that works well, thanks for the idea (plus I can do it with one
> fewer class):
Test is fine. Just one note/clarification:
63 // Loading (but not linking) Container will succeed.
Container was already loaded as part of the failing forName call, so
this second forName will just return it.
More information about the hotspot-dev