Hi Mandy,
Thanks for taking another look at this!
On 22/05/2018 7:47 AM, mandy chung wrote:
On 5/20/18 10:57 PM, David Holmes wrote:
- I suspect the @throws SecurityException in getNestMembers was
copied from getNestHost as it uses "returned class" (singular).
It refers to "If any returned class ..." and "that returned class". I
don't see any problematic singular uses - can you elaborate please.
As the host and members are in the same runtime package then maybe it
can be specified in terms of the host or members package?
I'm not sure how to accurately formulate that. The current wording was
based on similar @throws in getEnclosingClass, as suggested by Mandy:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-dev/2018-March/003955.html
and then refined a little.
@throws SecurityException in my version suggested to refer to "the
current class". I see your version referring to "the returned class"
which is what Alan commented on. getNestMembers returns more than one class.
The original copied wording was simply:
! * @throws SecurityException
! * If a security manager, <i>s</i>, is present and the
caller's
! * class loader is not the same as or an ancestor of the class
! * loader for the current class and invocation of {@link
! * SecurityManager#checkPackageAccess s.checkPackageAccess()}
! * denies access to the package of the current class
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8199309/webrev/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java.cdiff.html
then John pointed out that we don't need to do a security check if
returning the current class. Hence it was updated to the present wording
to exclude that case. This was discussed in the review on valhalla-dev
and you gave your okay to it then:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-dev/2018-March/003971.html
and as I responded to Alan, for getNestMembers() it doesn't say "the
returned class" it says "any returned class" and "that returned class".
There is no singular/plural ambiguity.
What about:
@throws SecurityException if this class is not in the nest of itself,
I think you mean if the class is in a nest consisting solely of itself?
But that seems convoluted to me regardless. The existing statements are
extremely clear IMHO:
getNestHost: "If the returned class is not the current class ..."
getNestMembers: "If any returned class is not the current class ..."
I don't see how they can be misinterpreted. ???
and if a security manager, <i>s</i>, is present and the caller'sclass
loader is not the same as or an ancestor of the nest of thisclass and
Something not right there - you're comparing a classloader with a nest ??
invocation of {@linkSecurityManager#checkPackageAccess
s.checkPackageAccess()}denies access to the package of the nest of class.
I would not want to refer to the "package of the nest".
The above can apply to both getNestHost and getNestMembers.
The javadoc can also explicitly state that "Classes in the same nest,
i.e. nest host and nest members, are in the same runtime package."
How is this adjustment in getNestHost (which is the only place where we
explain nests):
* <p>A <em>nest</em> is a set of classes and interfaces (nestmates) that
* form an access control context in which each nestmate has access to the
* private members of the other nestmates.
* The <em>nest host</em> is the class or interface designated to hold
the list of
* classes and interfaces that make up the nest, and to which each of the
* other nestmates refer.
+* All nestmates are implicitly defined in the same runtime package.
?
Thanks,
David
-----
Mandy
