On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 10:42:54 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadam...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This PR contains the API and implementation changes for JEP-412 [1]. A more >> detailed description of such changes, to avoid repetitions during the review >> process, is included as a separate comment. >> >> [1] - https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/412 > > Maurizio Cimadamore has updated the pull request incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > Address first batch of review comments Like Paul, I tracked the changes to this API in the Panama repo. Most of my remaining comments are small and come from re-reading the API docs. src/jdk.incubator.foreign/share/classes/jdk/incubator/foreign/CLinker.java line 270: > 268: > 269: /** > 270: * Converts a Java string into a null-terminated C string, using the > platform's default charset, Sorry if this has come up before, but, is the platform's default charset the right choice here? For other areas, we choose UTF-8 as the default. In fact, there is a draft JEP to move the default charset to UTF-8. So if there is an implicit need to match the underlying platform's charset then this may need to be revisited. For now, I just want to check that this is not an accidental reliance on the platform's default charset, but a deliberate one. src/jdk.incubator.foreign/share/classes/jdk/incubator/foreign/MemorySegment.java line 101: > 99: * <h2>Lifecycle and confinement</h2> > 100: * > 101: * Memory segments are associated to a resource scope (see {@link > ResourceScope}), which can be accessed using Typo?? "Memory segments are associated *with* a resource scope" src/jdk.incubator.foreign/share/classes/jdk/incubator/foreign/MemorySegment.java line 112: > 110: MemoryAccess.getLong(segment); // already closed! > 111: * }</pre></blockquote> > 112: * Additionally, access to a memory segment in subject to the > thread-confinement checks enforced by the owning scope; that is, Typo?? "Additionally, access to a memory segment *is* subject to ..." src/jdk.incubator.foreign/share/classes/jdk/incubator/foreign/MemorySegment.java line 114: > 112: * Additionally, access to a memory segment in subject to the > thread-confinement checks enforced by the owning scope; that is, > 113: * if the segment is associated with a shared scope, it can be accessed > by multiple threads; if it is associated with a confined > 114: * scope, it can only be accessed by the thread which own the scope. Typo?? "it can only be accessed by the thread which ownS the scope." src/jdk.incubator.foreign/share/classes/jdk/incubator/foreign/MemorySegment.java line 693: > 691: */ > 692: static MemorySegment allocateNative(MemoryLayout layout, > ResourceScope scope) { > 693: Objects.requireNonNull(scope); Should the allocateNative methods declare that they throw ISE, if the given ResourceScope is not alive? ( I found myself asking this q, then considering the behaviour of a SegmentAllocator that is asked to allocate after a RS has been closed ) ------------- Marked as reviewed by chegar (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3699
