> On 3 Apr 2017, at 16:40, Pavel Rappo <pavel.ra...@oracle.com> wrote: > > >> On 3 Apr 2017, at 20:39, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> 962 * [1-9][0-9]*((\.0)*\.[1-9][0-9]*)* >> >> You removed the initial “^” which is still mentioned in JDK-8148822 >> >> < `^[1-9][0-9]*(((\.0)*\.[1-9][0-9]*)*)*$`. The sequence may be of arbitrary >> --- >>> `^[1-9][0-9]*((\.0)*\.[1-9][0-9]*)*$`. The sequence may be of arbitrary >> >> JEP 223 is still using the former. Which is correct? > > The patch from the thread [1] I referred to in my previous email removes ^ > and $. > So in this case I simply reused the patch and, once again [2], I do agree this > is an odd place to use boundary matchers, given $VNUM is only a prefix in > $VSTR > and not the whole regex. > > As for the JEP question, it's more for original designers/authors. If we agree > on it I will update the JEP. >
Ok, no objections, i was just unsure as to which was the proposed authoritative answer. Perhaps for the record you should also update the description of JDK-8148822? >> Since Version is now value based i think you need to check where it’s >> identity is used and replace with equals (which means ensuring that equals >> is efficient and could use identity under the covers). See usages in JarFile. > > Will do, thanks! > >> — >> >> Separately i wish we could avoid using List<Integer> as the internal >> representation, it’s very inefficient, int[] is much better, the cost is >> then on the version() method but it’s easy to create an immutable List >> wrapping the array. (I logged an issue for that, but cannot remember the >> number.) > > What are you concerns specifically? It’s just not particularly efficient to box int to Integer into a List on the heap esp for the expected number of version components, and i suspect the version() method probably not something that will often be called, so taking a hit there with a AbstractList wrapper is fine. It’s quite a simple change, esp. with the the foundation you have set up, so seems worthwhile (separate issue, not this one). Paul. > > The startup time? > The amount of simultaneously existing Version objects at runtime? > The use of `Integer` wrapper? > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > [1] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-October/044277.html > [2] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-March/046941.html > >
