RE: Use of VMSecurityManager.getClassContext()

[Andrew Haley]

Jeroen Frijters writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > David Holmes writes:
 > >  > That was my initial thought but the generalization is 
 > > trivial and useful.
 > >  > For example, given the XXX/VMxxx split having only
 > >  > getCallerClass wouldn't allow XXX to defer to VMxxx and have
 > >  > VMxxx find the real caller.
 > > 
 > > Perhaps we don't need to defer to VMxxx if we have a portable way to
 > > do getCallerClass.
 > 
 > I don't see how.

Well, if the only reason for the VMxxx method in some cases it to find
the caller's class, and we have a well-defined getCallerClass(), then
we don't in that particular case need a VMxxx method.

 > My desire to have a getCallerClass is because I want to be able to
 > support method inlining properly. If the JIT knows about
 > getCallerClass, it can do the right thing. The generalization is
 > not inline proof.

I don't think the generalization can be used reliably in the presence
of optimization.  It'll only work with the simplest VM designs unless
we keep a lot of extra information around.

Andrew.