large Class.forName() patch

[Artur Biesiadowski]

Archie Cobbs wrote:

> I don't understand this comment:
> 
> +       /* This is kind of strange, but Sun's implementation
> +          does not allow lookups like Class.forName("int"),
> +          so if this is a primitive type, we just pretend
> +          it could not be found. It would be handy to load
> +          "int" or "char" by name, but oh well */
> 
> Why would a JVM be expected to recognize a Java language keyword?
> As far as the JVM is concerned, Java is just one of many higher
> level languages that are capable of being compiled to bytecode
> (or am I misreading something, this was just a quick take).


But it could understand I, J etc - especially for [I,[[I and friends
classes. Certainly 'int' is not right thing - but single letter codes
are JVM thing.

Is there any place where it is explicitly told if Class.forName supports
arrays of primitives ?

Artur