Record attribute binary format

Maurizio Cimadamore maurizio.cimadamore at
Sat Oct 12 23:32:04 UTC 2019

On 12/10/2019 22:17, forax at wrote:
> BTW, Should java.lang.Class have a method getCanonicalRecordConstructor() ?

This would be helpful, as the serialization use case already shows us 
that people would want to infer the signature of the canonical 
descriptor from the accessors return types. Which is doable, but a bit 
tedious to do. I was also worried, if we drop the 'isVarargs' from the 
component about how a client might reconstruct vararg-ness of the 
constructor. In the reflective lookup that's not too important, after 
all the runtime type of the components is the same, regardless of 
varargs) - but for source reflection this might be more important to 
reconstruct correctly - so I think it would be nice to have an official 
'link' between the record/class and its canonical constructor, both in 
core reflection, and source reflection.


> BTW2, if in the future we need some access flags on record components, we can still add a new attribute like MethodParameters on the Record attribute, so the current binary format is Ok.

More information about the amber-spec-experts mailing list