> Jeroen Frijters wrote:
> The reference implementation of VMClass will not have any instance
> members, but VMs might choose to add instance state. However, after
> thinking about it some more, I think it would be better to just add
an
> instance member to Class, called vmState (or whatever) of type Object.
> That is more flexible (at the cost of additional downcasts).
>
> The only overhead for you is the unused vmState reference field in
each
> Class instance.
This sounds like a reasonable approach
to me too. Jikes RVM currently uses its own implementation of java.lang.Class,
but we might be able to switch over to something like this. Having
the vmstate be of type Object having VMClass be all static methods
will be easier for us to migrate to than the current design.