collection of small fixes from running runtime tests with -Xcomp
zoltan.majo at oracle.com
Wed Mar 15 15:57:53 UTC 2017
> On 2017. Mar 15., at 16:37, Roland Westrelin <rwestrel at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Currently, an L-type and the matching Q-type have the same memory
>> layout, so we could treat them as being the same. But by starting to
>> doing so we'll most likely encounter some difficult-to-trace errors. So
>> I'm more for bailing out compilations (or updating the type system to
>> consider Q-types as subclasses of java.lang.Object).
> The problem in my case was that the root of the compilation is a lambda
> form which takes and object argument but is passed a value type. There's
> no way in that case to know at compile time that what is passed is a
> value type so no way to bail out.
thank you for explaining. I meant "bail out" in a more general way -- I thought of something along the lines of refuse compilation in cases where mixing types happens or can potentially happen.
More information about the valhalla-dev