In case this helps, here are some generated source specs for comparison:
file sizes:
-rw-r--r-- 1 dan staff 298619 Jul 24 10:46 7.0.16-generated-source.java
-rw-r--r-- 1 dan staff 300421 Jul 24 10:46 7.0.19-generated-source.java
line counts:
7328 7.0.16-generated-source.java
7331 7.0.19-generated-source.java
They're roughly identical. The diffs are essentially:
3,4c3,7
< * Version: Apache Tomcat/7.0.16
< * Generated at: 2011-07-24 14:45:00 UTC
---
> * Version: Apache Tomcat/7.0.19
> * Generated at: 2011-07-24 14:27:53 UTC
> * Note: The last modified time of this file was set to
> * the last modified time of the source file after
> * generation to assist with modification tracking.
516c519
< private static java.util.List<java.lang.String> _jspx_dependants;
---
> private static java.util.Map<java.lang.String,java.lang.Long>
_jspx_dependants;
...and then the list & map diffs follow. But that's it.
Dan
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Dan Checkoway <[email protected]>wrote:
> I recently upgraded from 7.0.16 to 7.0.19, and having made no other changes
> whatsoever, I've bumped into a new problem compiling long JSPs:
>
> java.lang.Error: Unresolved compilation problem:
>
>
> org.apache.jsp.mydir.my_005fexample_jsp._jspService(my_005fexample_jsp.java:593)
> org.apache.jasper.runtime.HttpJspBase.service(HttpJspBase.java:70)
> javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:722)
>
> org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServletWrapper.service(JspServletWrapper.java:433)
>
> org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.serviceJspFile(JspServlet.java:389)
> org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.service(JspServlet.java:333)
> javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:722)
>
> Granted, this JSP ends up generating java that's 7331 lines long, and 300k
> in size...but it works absolutely fine in 7.0.16. Did some sort of jasper
> or compiler option change in 7.0.19? I'm not sure if the generated source
> got larger, or if the new version of tomcat is more restrictive.
>
> I'm working on trimming my JSP down, which is something I need to do
> anyway, but I wanted to raise this issue in case there's a simple fix. I
> remember in the past (6.0.x some time ago), tomcat used to give a more
> informative error in this circumstance, indicating that class size or method
> size was the issue. Now the error is completely ambiguous...and it took me
> a little while to figure out (read: guess) that method size was the issue.
>
> Anyway, heads-up about this. Thanks!
>
> Dan
>
