| "code too large" limit: Eclipse vs. JDK [message #113338] |
Mon, 03 November 2003 18:12  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jlm_one.yahoo.com
We have some monster auto-generated methods that, when saved in Eclipse and
jar'ed-up using Ant in Eclipse, work just fine. But, if I compile the
source manually (using Ant) at the command line with JDK 1.4.2_02, I get
"code too large" errors, presumably due to the 64K bytecode limit.
Interestingly, JDK 1.4.0 will compile the code, but I get the 64K limit
error trying to run it.
What is Eclipse doing differently? I can understand Eclipse failing to
recognize the error, since some JDKs seem to ignore it, but it's a mystery
how the code executes. Does anyone know Eclipse's trick, and if so, if I
can use the same trick when I compile using javac?
Thanks!
-- Joe
|
|
|
| Re: "code too large" limit: Eclipse vs. JDK [message #113897 is a reply to message #113338] |
Wed, 05 November 2003 05:00  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Eclipse compiler is checking the bytecode size limit, don't worry. I presume
we are producing more compact code than the JDK compiler.
You must be close to the 64K limit with Eclipse, and slightly over with
Javac...
"JLM" <jlm_one@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:bo6nbc$ga1$1@eclipse.org...
> We have some monster auto-generated methods that, when saved in Eclipse
and
> jar'ed-up using Ant in Eclipse, work just fine. But, if I compile the
> source manually (using Ant) at the command line with JDK 1.4.2_02, I get
> "code too large" errors, presumably due to the 64K bytecode limit.
> Interestingly, JDK 1.4.0 will compile the code, but I get the 64K limit
> error trying to run it.
>
> What is Eclipse doing differently? I can understand Eclipse failing to
> recognize the error, since some JDKs seem to ignore it, but it's a mystery
> how the code executes. Does anyone know Eclipse's trick, and if so, if I
> can use the same trick when I compile using javac?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- Joe
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03858 seconds
Home