On Sat, 18 May 2024 05:24:16 GMT, ExE Boss <d...@openjdk.org> wrote: >> Core reflection's generic signature parsing uses an ancient library with >> outdated visitor pattern on a tree model and contains unnecessary >> boilerplates. This is a duplication of ClassFile API's signature model. We >> should just move to ClassFile API, which is more throughoutly tested as well. >> >> To ensure compatibility, new tests are added to ensure consistent behavior >> when encountering malformed signatures or signatures with missing types. The >> reflective objects have been preserved and the only change is that lazy >> expansion now happens from CF objects, to reduce compatibility risks. > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java line 3487: > >> 3485: >> 3486: // Generic info repository; lazily initialized >> 3487: private transient volatile @Stable ClassGenericInfo<T> genericInfo; > > I don’t think this field can be `@Stable`, as generic signatures can change > when a class gets redefined by **JVM TI**, just like > [simple][Class::getSimpleName()] and [canonical > names][Class::getCanonicalName()]. > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/8acdd2d7c8de17515b87815d54ce556237039406/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java#L3452-L3454 > > [Class::getSimpleName()]: > https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/22/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/Class.html#getSimpleName() > [Class::getCanonicalName()]: > https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/22/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/Class.html#getCanonicalName()
Existing genericInfo is not part of ReflectionData. The migration of genericInfo into reflectionData should be done in a separate task. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19281#discussion_r1605781541
