Claes, Peter,

  Thanks for the revised webrev and Peter's thorough review.  webrev.05
looks much better.  My comment is mostly minor.

On 10/13/2014 8:41 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8060130/webrev.05

ClassLoader.java

line 1582-1586 - I suggest to get rid of the "oldpkg" variable
(it's really the package to be used and not an old pkg).

    pkg = new Package(name, specTitle, specVersion, specVendor,
                            implTitle, implVersion, implVendor,
                            sealBase, this);
    if (packages.putIfAbsent(name, pkg) != null) {
        throw new IllegalArgumentException(name + " already defined");
    }
    return pkg;

line 1634-1635: nit: the pkgName variable is not really needed.
   it's in the existing code and probably good to remove it.
Package.java

line 473: maybe better to leave the ClassLoader parameter in the constructor.
   I thought about adding a comment saying that this private constructor
   is only used for system package but keeping the loader parameter makes
   it more explicit.

line 569: nit: formatting - indent to the right to align the first parameter
   to new Package(...)

line 621-623: is this really needed?  Uncontended case seems to be
   the common case.  It seems the synchronized overhead would be
   insignificant.

line 624: a space is missing between synchronized and "("

Looks like there is one test jdk/test/java/lang/ClassLoader/GetPackage.java
about packages.  Can you add a new test to verify the system packages as that
is one major change in your patch?

Thanks
Mandy

Reply via email to