-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 327
Removing abs_path and adding module to serialized stack frames #659
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
| jw.writeByte(OBJECT_END); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private void serializeStackFrameModule(final String fullyQualifiedClassName) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What about using the Java 9 module or jar file name instead of the package name?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems like using the package name aligns better with the majority of other agents (using sort of namespace for module).
@axw WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I think the package name aligns better with the other agents.
- In Python, it's the Python module, which is effectively a namespace. This may be where the field name originated. In Python, there could be multiple modules distributed together in one package (~jar).
- In Go, it's the package path (again, ~namespace). Again, there could be multiple packages within one module, a relatively new concept to Go. Just to keep us on our toes, the names/relations are flipped from Python.
- In Node.js, it's the node module name.
- For Ruby, there's no reported module as it's not readily available.
The Jar/module name could be useful for linking to Code Search, but I would think it'd be more useful for now to report the package name than the jar, since a large project may have multiple packages with the classes/files of the same name.
axw
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, but let's make sure we're all in agreement before merging.
@axw "all" mean- us three, or other agent devs as well? I thought a package would also be better in terms of consistency. As I said, jars are not something we have at this stage, it would take some effort, for example- creating a file-system-tree-like cache to link a class name to a source jar (probably when loaded). Modules are only relevant to Java 9 (and even then not always?), so package name is probably the most consistent. I just noted that the name |
I just meant us three. |
No description provided.