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
