On Mon, 25 May 2026 09:03:47 GMT, David Simms <[email protected]> wrote:

>> This is a "*sub-review pull request*" for the first 
>> [preview](https://openjdk.org/jeps/12) of [JEP 401: Value Classes and 
>> Objects](https://openjdk.org/jeps/401), specifically 
>> [JDK-8317279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317279): Standard library 
>> implementation of value classes and objects 
>> 
>>> [!NOTE]
>>> This pull request and the other sub-review pull requests listed below are 
>>> based on the "*master pull request*" 
>>> (https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31120). It contains the same full set 
>>> of code changes as the "*master pull request*" to preserve the full 
>>> implementation context; the language compiler, JVM, and standard library 
>>> changes are intertwined. This separate pull requests exist only to 
>>> subdivide the review and related discussion by area.
>> 
>> Other areas for review:
>> 
>> - [JDK-8317277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317277): Java language 
>> implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31121
>> - [JDK-8317278](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317278): JVM 
>> implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31122
>> 
>> Code changes resulting from the review process should be made in 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/).
>> 
>> `valhalla/lworld` is currently updated from `jdk/master` whenever a weekly 
>> [`jdk` tag](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/tags) is created. At that time, 
>> code changes from `valhalla/lworld` will be propagated to the master pull 
>> request and to all sub-review pull requests, including this one.
>> 
>> Ultimately, review sign-off will be recorded on the "*master pull request*", 
>> and this pull request will be closed without integration.
>> 
>> This pull request has a large code surface area and often conflicts with 
>> `jdk/master` on a daily basis. Refer to 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/) for the latest 
>> state of the project code, keeping in mind that it may lag several days 
>> behind `jdk/master`. Both repositories may be needed as references during 
>> review.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> David Simms has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 2732 commits:
> 
>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'valhalla/lworld' into 8317277
>  - 8385344: [lworld] ProblemList 
> tools/javac/platform/CanHandleClassFilesTest.java with --enable-preview
>    
>    Reviewed-by: fparain
>  - 8385301: [lworld] Remove 
> serviceability/sa/TestJhsdbJstackMixedWithXComp.java from problem list
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dsimms
>  - 8385331: [lworld] adjust ValueComparisonTest.java again to work around 
> JDK-8370769
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dsimms
>  - 8385311: [lworld] TypePtr::eq() should use accessor method for _offset
>    
>    Reviewed-by: mchevalier
>  - 8385259: [lworld] Clean up LP64 in x86 code
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dlong, thartmann
>  - Merge
>    
>    Merge jdk-27+23
>  - 8384924: [lworld] misc cleanups
>    
>    Reviewed-by: thartmann
>  - 8385167: [lworld] C1: minor cleanups
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dlong, thartmann
>  - 8384066: [lworld] TestDeadAllocationRemoval.java is ignored by jtreg
>    
>    Reviewed-by: thartmann
>  - ... and 2722 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/86637704...b3b4a2cb

src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/ObjectOutputStream.java line 170:

> 168:  *          {@code writeReplace}</a> method can provide a proxy object 
> instead. That
> 169:  *          object can then be serialized, and used to reconstruct the 
> expected value
> 170:  *          class instance at deserialization time.

The text in the preview-block aligns with the JEP 401 but I'm wondering how to 
read this with java.lang.Integer or other migrated value class as an example. 
Support I write an Integer to an ObjectOutputStream when running with preview 
features enabled. It appears to serialize it even though it is a value class 
and not a record. Maybe there is more in the serialization spec that I need to 
read on this?

(The context for asking is really the indirect rather than direct case and 
whether there is an issue with migrated value classes or not)

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31123#discussion_r3324054791

Reply via email to