On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 08:52:17 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов <d...@openjdk.java.net> wrote:
>> `List.of()` along with `Set.of()` create unmodifiable `List/Set` but with >> smaller footprint comparing to `Arrays.asList()` / `new HashSet()` when >> called with vararg of size 0, 1, 2. >> >> In general replacement of `Arrays.asList()` with `List.of()` is dubious as >> the latter is null-hostile, however in some cases we are sure that arguments >> are non-null. Into this PR I've included the following cases (in addition to >> those where the argument is proved to be non-null at compile-time): >> - `MethodHandles.longestParameterList()` never returns null >> - parameter types are never null >> - interfaces used for proxy construction and returned from >> `Class.getInterfaces()` are never null >> - exceptions types of method signature are never null > > Сергей Цыпанов has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > 8282662: Revert dubious changes in MethodType src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/validator/EndEntityChecker.java line 119: > 117: // TLS key exchange algorithms requiring keyEncipherment key usage > 118: private static final Collection<String> KU_SERVER_ENCRYPTION = > 119: Arrays.asList("RSA"); I understand that you haven't modified the `KU_SERVER_KEY_AGREEMENT` on line 122 because it has 4 elements. However, these 2 nearby lines using different styles look a little strange to me. Why restrict the number to 0, 1, and 2? If we have defined methods with up to 9 arguments, does that mean the new type is suitable for 9 elements? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7729