11/30/2022 0 Comments Jrebel static methods![]() ![]() #Jrebel static methods update#However, Java 8 update 11 brought with it a stricter bytecode verifier, one which rejects classes that use such constructs in their bytecode, and causes verification errors to be thrown and JVMs to crash. ![]() #Jrebel static methods code#The ability to execute code before the call to super can be pretty useful! You can see in the simplified bytecode above that there are both an invocation ( INVOKESTATIC) and even a branch ( IFEQ - “if equal”) taking place before the first call to the super-constructor ( INVOKESPECIAL).īear in mind that although the above code is not legal Java, and thus no Java compiler would ever produce the equivalent bytecode - there are plenty of other tools which potentially could, such as compilers of other JVM languages which do not follow Java’s constraints, and many other tools such as bytecode instrumentation libraries. … The equivalent bytecode could pass verification. This means, that although no Java compiler would ever let you compile this code: However, it turns out that up until these recent JDK updates, this constraint had not been fully enforced. ![]() This imposes certain limitations on how branching can be performed around the call to super(…) or this(…). Even when you don’t explicitly write super(), the compiler implicitly inserts it for you at the very beginning of the constructor.Ī special case of this constraint which can be seen in the bytecode verification rules, states that a constructor must not end its execution without calling its superclass’s constructor (or one of its own overloads), otherwise leaving this not fully initialized. Any piece of code before that - and your code won’t compile. One such well-known constraint in the Java language, is that the very first thing you must do in a constructor, before doing anything else, is call either super(…) or this(…). As the JVM was originally designed with the Java programming language in mind, many of these rules are directly derived from Java rules and constraints. In order for bytecode to pass verification, it must adhere to a set of rules defined in the class file format specification. This process is called bytecode verification, and the part of the JVM that’s responsible for it is the bytecode verifier. If the bytecode is good, the class is successfully loaded into memory otherwise, a VerifyError is thrown, just like the one at the beginning of the post. It basically checks if the code that’s being loaded can actually be executed. When the JVM loads a class file from the classpath into memory, it must first make sure the bytecode is valid and that the code is structured correctly. When compiled, its bytecode looks like this: I’m not going to go into how bytecode works, as it is a subject worthy of a post (or several posts) of its own, but just to get a feel for what bytecode looks like - take this simple Java method for example: The JVM doesn’t know and doesn’t care what the source language was - it only knows bytecode. The JVM’s machine code, if you will.Īll JVM-based languages are compiled into bytecode, from Java, through Scala, Groovy, Clojure, and so on. Java bytecode and the bytecode verifierīytecode is the intermediate language the JVM actually executes, and in which compiled. Unlike previous versions, it does not allow calls to super-constructors from within branched code. The reason these errors suddenly started appearing stems from the fact that the bytecode verifier in the latest updates is a bit more strict than that of previous versions. The errors spewed by the JVM are long and verbose, but in essence they look something like this:Įxception in thread “main” : Bad method call from inside of a branchĬom/takipi/tests/dc/DepthCounter.()V invokespecial If you’ve been keeping up with the news in the Java world lately, you’ve probably heard that the latest Java 8 build released by Oracle, Java 8u11 (and Java 7u65), introduced errors and broke some popular 3rd party tools such as ZeroTurnaround’s JRebel, Javassist, Google’s Guice, and even Groovy itself. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |