From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from aibo.runbox.com (aibo.runbox.com [91.220.196.211]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4DB13858D34 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 05:10:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org E4DB13858D34 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=bothner.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=per@bothner.com Received: from [10.9.9.73] (helo=submission02.runbox) by mailtransmit02.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfzBr-0006x1-Eu; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 07:10:19 +0200 Received: by submission02.runbox with esmtpsa [Authenticated alias (524175)] (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1jfzBm-0007Dk-18; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 07:10:14 +0200 Subject: Re: define-simple-class fields with ConstantValue attribute? To: Jamison Hope , kawa@sourceware.org References: From: Per Bothner Message-ID: <18544777-b924-047e-6b87-03bb51701210@bothner.com> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 22:10:10 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: kawa@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Kawa mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 05:10:23 -0000 On 6/1/20 11:16 AM, Jamison Hope wrote: > Is there a field initialization syntax for define-simple-class which > will cause the field to have a ConstantValue attribute set? I got this sort-of-working (with some testsuite failures, that are probably fixable), by hacking object.java (which is used to "syntax-expand" define-simple-class). However, I think it might be more general and less fragile to change this at bytecode-generating time, in SetExp.java. (A minor downside is you might get a useless empty method, but that's acceptable, I think.) I'll look into this approach shortly, perhaps in the morning. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/