[armedbear-devel] Proposed patch for ticket #58 (inspection of Java objects)
alanruttenberg at gmail.com
Tue Jul 28 22:40:05 UTC 2009
Just fyi - Michael Travers wrote the beginnings of swing based
inspector for java that I use in LSW for productive work. Anyone is
welcome to grab it and improve it or just steal ideas or code. It's
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Alessio Stalla<alessiostalla at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler<tcr at freebits.de> wrote:
>> Alessio Stalla writes:
>>> Sure, I think the abcl inspector does this too. However, with Lisp
>>> objects B is B itself; with Java objects, B is a representation of
>>> object B' in a certain state. If B' changes, B remains the same.
>> Where and why does that translation take place? I can see the need for
>> to wrap "native" Java objects into an LispObject so you can pass it to
>> Lisp functions, right? But why the deep wrapping?
> Poor design by my part ;)
>>> However, I understand now that I can change that easily - I can return
>>> the raw untranslated Java object - you'll see all fields have a value
>>> of #<JAVA-OBJECT foo.bar.Class>, even for numbers, arrays, strings and
>>> other simple types; but that will always reflect the current object,
>>> and you'll still be able to inspect it to see what it is, so I think
>>> it's a sensible thing to do.
>> Yes, it's what I'd expect.
> Ok, here's the new & improved patch :)
> armedbear-devel mailing list
> armedbear-devel at common-lisp.net
More information about the armedbear-devel