Review Request JDK-8186050: StackFrame should provide the method signature

Peter Levart peter.levart at
Sat Sep 2 09:57:16 UTC 2017

Hi Mandy,

The API looks fine to me.

Note that there is an opportunity for a follow-up optimization of the 
StackFrameInfo::getDescriptor() case. When MemberName's 'type' field is 
filled by native expandFromVM() it is usually filled with the descriptor 
string. MemberName::getMethodType() then parses this string into a 
MemberType, resolving all the types. So when 
StackFrameInfo::getDescriptor() is called, the descriptor string is 1st 
parsed into MethodType and then formatted back to the descriptor. By 
introducing new method into package-private MemberName - say 
getMethodDescriptorString(), this intermediate conversion could often be 
avoided (for example, if getMethodDescriptorString() was called before 
getMethodType() on an instance of MethodName).

Regards, Peter

On 09/01/2017 07:39 AM, mandy chung wrote:
> Updated webrev:
> This introduces two new methods, StackFrame::getMethodType and 
> StackFrame::getDescriptor.
> Mandy
> On 8/30/17 12:25 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>> Hi Mandy,
>> thanks for taking care of this.
>> In my opinion, we should provide both getMethodType() and 
>> getDescriptor(),
>> getDescriptor() is handy for logging (finding the right overload when 
>> line numbers are not present) and getMethodType() is the one you 
>> whant if you want to inspect the runtime view of the stack frames 
>> (and by example interact with java.lang.invoke). For me, it's the 
>> same reason that give us getDeclaringClass() and getClassName() in 
>> the current API.
>> So getDescriptor() can be called with no restriction but 
>> getMethodType() requires RETAIN_CLASS_REFERENCE.
>> regards,
>> Rémi
>> ----- Mail original -----
>>> De: "mandy chung" <mandy.chung at>
>>> À: "core-libs-dev" <core-libs-dev at>
>>> Envoyé: Mardi 29 Août 2017 00:57:28
>>> Objet: Review Request JDK-8186050: StackFrame should provide the 
>>> method signature
>>> Method signature is missing in the StackFrame API. This proposes to add
>>> StackFrame::getMethodDescriptor method to return the method descriptor
>>> in a stack frame.
>>> Webrev at:
>>> There are a couple options how to present the method signature in the
>>> API level:
>>> 1. Class<?>[] getParameterTypes() and Class<?> getReturnTypes() 
>>> similiar
>>> to what java.lang.reflect.Method has.
>>> 2. java.lang.invoke.MethodType
>>> 3. a String representation (i) comma-separated list of the method's
>>> formal parameter types (ii) bytecode method descriptor as specified 
>>> in JVMS
>>> Returning Class<?> instance should require to add a new StackWalker
>>> option to access to the parameter types and return type for option #1
>>> and #2. StackFrame::getDeclaringClass requires the stack walker to have
>>> the RETAIN_CLASS_REFERENCE capability.
>>> Option #2 returning MethodType is handy while java.lang would reference
>>> a type in java.lang.invoke.
>>> Option #3 requires the caller to parse the return string and call
>>> Class.forName to get the Class<?> instance. OTOH
>>> MethodType::fromMethodDescriptorString method that returns MethodType
>>> from a bytecode method descriptor string.
>>> Method signature is for information for typical cases. Getting Class<?>
>>> for the parameter types and return type would be a niche case. I think
>>> returning the method descriptor string is a good option - keep the API
>>> simple and can use MethodType::fromMethodDescriptorString to get back
>>> the types if needed.
>>> thanks
>>> Mandy

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list