Skip to content
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

Jump to bottom

Assure JDK 11 compatibility for DefaultMethodInvokingMethodInterceptor [DATACMNS-1376] #1811

Closed
spring-projects-issues opened this issue Aug 16, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

Assure JDK 11 compatibility for DefaultMethodInvokingMethodInterceptor [DATACMNS-1376] #1811

spring-projects-issues opened this issue Aug 16, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees
@mp911de
Labels
in: core in: repository type: enhancement
Milestone
2.1 RC2 (Lovelace)

Comments

@spring-projects-issues
Copy link

@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues commented Aug 16, 2018

Oliver Drotbohm opened DATACMNS-1376 and commented

Issue Links:

  • SPR-15859 MethodHandles.Lookup.defineClass for CGLIB class definition purposes

Referenced from: pull request #307

Backported to: 2.0.10 (Kay SR10)

1 votes, 4 watchers
@spring-projects-issues
Copy link
Author

@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues commented Aug 16, 2018

Mark Paluch commented

We're generating a warning log event on Java 9 and newer runtimes because we're trying to access a private constructor first before using MethodHandles.privateLookupIn(…). Default method invocation is not affected and works fine on Java 8 and Java 9 and higher. By reversing the lookup and wrapping it into a Lazy we should get rid of the warning

@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues added in: repository type: enhancement in: core labels Dec 30, 2020
@peergynt peergynt mentioned this issue Apr 11, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@mp911de mp911de

Labels
in: core in: repository type: enhancement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
2.1 RC2 (Lovelace)
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@mp911de @spring-projects-issues