From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-18259-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 8704 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2004 16:47:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 8614 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2004 16:47:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (209.128.65.135)
  by sourceware.org with QMTP; 10 Jun 2004 16:47:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 28831 invoked by uid 10); 10 Jun 2004 16:47:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 27796 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jun 2004 16:47:29 -0000
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@wasabisystems.com>
To: tromey@redhat.com
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>,
  java@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Binary Compatibility: debug info for compiled Java programs
References: <16582.65277.81118.189889@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<20040609130859.GA7514@nevyn.them.org>
	<16583.3516.604885.805420@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<20040609132951.GA8017@nevyn.them.org>
	<16583.4773.74100.735457@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<20040609221710.GA16922@nevyn.them.org>
	<87ise0bc8y.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
	<20040610163718.GA24803@nevyn.them.org>
	<874qpjbcju.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:47:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <874qpjbcju.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
Message-ID: <m3aczb1hsu.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00097.txt.bz2

Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:

> The symbols in the otable (and actually I've been using shorthand
> here, we have a second "atable" for addresses as well -- same
> difference though) are resolved when the class ("Foo") is linked.  In
> Java this is done at runtime, the JVM Spec (and perhaps the JLS) has
> information on the precise steps involved in class preparation and
> initialization.

By the way, Tom and Andrew, I meant to ask, but I forgot: would it
make sense to build the numeric otables and atables for the common
case, and then recompute only when required?  I have to think that the
common case is pretty darn common--I'm sure people don't spend all
their time loading classes into different hierarchies.  Perhaps you
already do this.

Ian