Re: Re: LocalVariableSorter

Hi Eugene,

in fact, I don't need the variable to be in the localVar table. But as 
mentioned in my first mail, just using the newLocal method provided by 
the localVarSorter doesn't work. Obviously the Sorter is doing 
"something" (i.e. it seems to be invoked in the right way )- e.g. 
shifting the indexPositions of exisitng variables in the table - leaving 
"space" for the created variable. But if I try to access the new 
variable with a store operation, the store operation's index in the 
bytecode changes automatically to a value that is defined in the 
variable table (in contrast to the new variable that is not defined in 
the table).
ISTORE 1 automatically changes to ISTORE 0 e.g. when looking at bytecode 
after the instrumentation process using a TraceClassVisitor. Of course 
this usually ends in a verify error because of typing problems. So 
basically my problem is not to insert new entries to the table, but to 
prevent the bytecode to change by some magic. It seems as if the index 
in the store operation is changing because "something" decided that at 
this point in time no variable could be accessed at the given index 
position. Any recommendations to solve that problem?

Eugene Kuleshov schrieb:
> Nikolas,
>
>   If you need your new variable in the local var table debug info,
> then you should call visitLocalVariable() method
>
>   regards,
>   Eugene
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Nikolas Nehmer
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a question regarding the LocalVariableSorter. I`m trying to add an
>> additional local variable calling the newLocal method. Looking at the
>> localVariable entries in the resulting bytecode, one can see that the
>> variable indexes are "shifted" according to the added variable - but there
>> is no additional entry added to the localVariable table. If I'm trying to
>> access the added variable at the corresponding index position, the index
>> within the store (let's asume it's a store statement that I'm using to
>> access the newly defined variable) statement is shifted (by some magic) to a
>> close value that is present (index 1 --> index 2) in the local variable
>> table. Any ideas?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Nikolas
>>
>>
>> --
>> You receive this message as a subscriber of the [email protected] mailing list.
>> To unsubscribe: mailto:[email protected]
>> For general help: mailto:[email protected]?subject=help
>> OW2 mailing lists service home page: http://www.ow2.org/wws
>>
>>
>>     


-- 
Dipl.-Inf. Nikolas Nehmer,
Dept. of Computer Science. University of Kaiserslautern 
P.O. Box 3049, 67653 Kaiserslautern, Germany.
room 36/308, phone: +49 (0) 631 - 205 2644, fax: +49 (0) 631 - 205 3299
mail: [email protected]

-- 
You receive this message as a subscriber of the [email protected] mailing list.
To unsubscribe: mailto:[email protected]
For general help: mailto:[email protected]?subject=help
OW2 mailing lists service home page: http://www.ow2.org/wws