[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16345192#comment-16345192 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-7966: --------------------------------------- I worked today and made the branch on github up to date: * It now applies the classfile patching to all modules, Solr was disabled (not needed there) * It runs tests in Java 9 with a modified classpath (it puts the patched classes before the main classes), so we can actually also test the pathed stuff. This "hack" just emulates a MR JAR file. It is really dirty, because it only applies this to the main classes. To fully fix this issue we should think about using the JAR files for testing and not build a classpath with raw class files. But that's time for another issue. I will now do some tests with the lucene benchmarking. I just have to fix it to use the JAR files instead of using plain jar files. > build mr-jar and use some java 9 methods if available > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-7966 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966 > Project: Lucene - Core > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: core/other, general/build > Reporter: Robert Muir > Priority: Major > Labels: Java9 > Attachments: LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch, > LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch > > > See background: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/238 > It would be nice to use some of the newer array methods and range checking > methods in java 9 for example, without waiting for lucene 10 or something. If > we build an MR-jar, we can start migrating our code to use java 9 methods > right now, it will use optimized methods from java 9 when thats available, > otherwise fall back to java 8 code. > This patch adds: > {code} > Objects.checkIndex(int,int) > Objects.checkFromToIndex(int,int,int) > Objects.checkFromIndexSize(int,int,int) > Arrays.mismatch(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int) > Arrays.compareUnsigned(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int) > Arrays.equal(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int) > // did not add char/int/long/short/etc but of course its possible if needed > {code} > It sets these up in {{org.apache.lucene.future}} as 1-1 mappings to java > methods. This way, we can simply directly replace call sites with java 9 > methods when java 9 is a minimum. Simple 1-1 mappings mean also that we only > have to worry about testing that our java 8 fallback methods work. > I found that many of the current byte array methods today are willy-nilly and > very lenient for example, passing invalid offsets at times and relying on > compare methods not throwing exceptions, etc. I fixed all the instances in > core/codecs but have not looked at the problems with AnalyzingSuggester. Also > SimpleText still uses a silly method in ArrayUtil in similar crazy way, have > not removed that one yet. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org