On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 21:21:43 GMT, Kim Barrett <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The sorted blocks of includes have deteriorated to the point that I felt
>> compelled to clean up some of the issues.
>>
>> One of the more prevalent issues is that files in src/hotspot/share/include
>> are not properly sorted. There has been some discussion that that was done
>> on purpose, but it just adds another exception to the include rules that
>> don't have any practical purposes, IMHO. It also goes against our written
>> style guide around include files. One argument why it was OK have the files
>> in include/ pushed up to the top of the sorted block, was that the file was
>> included without specifying a directory. That's an argument that contradicts
>> how we treat platform-dependent files, which (unfortunately) often also are
>> specified without a prefixed directory, so I don't think that's a good
>> enough argument, again IMHO. To remove this special case, I've removed the
>> extraneous make file entry to have src/hotspot/share/include in the set of
>> directories to search for headers when compiling HotSpot. Now all the header
>> files in src/hotspot/share/include gets included by specifying the path from
>> src/hotspot/share
, just like the other platform-independent headers in HotSpot.
>>
>> While going over the include headers I've also cleaned up surrounding
>> whitespaces and incorrect include guards.
>
> src/hotspot/os/windows/jvm_windows.cpp line 27:
>
>> 25: #include "precompiled.hpp"
>> 26: #include "include/jvm.h"
>> 27: #include "os_windows.hpp"
>
> os_windows should be at the end, included using `OS_HEADER("os")`.
But should we be directly including os_windows.hpp, rather than including
os.hpp?
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11108
