Since there is no new webrev I assume you incorporated all the stuff below. If
that's the case then it looks good.
On Sep 20, 2013, at 6:18 PM, John Rose <john.r.r...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> I don't see much value in documenting buggy behavior of early JDK7 in JDK8
>> code. So, I would remove it.
>
> OK. I think I had it in mainly to make sure the unit tests did something
> interesting.
>
>> Regarding the test:
>> 31 * @run main/othervm/timeout=3600
>> - why do you have timeout set to 1h?
>
> Copy-and-paste from some other test. Removed.
>
>> I like the idea how you count events.
>>
>> As a suggestion for enhancement - maybe it's more reliable to check the
>> "type" of event as well? To ensure that particular class was initialized.
>
> Good idea. But since each unique init event is stored in a separate
> variable, it's easy to check this without explicit event types. I did the
> following, for each of the six test cases:
>
> @@ -150,9 +150,11 @@
> }
>
> private static int runFoo() throws Throwable {
> + assertEquals(Init1Tick, 0); // Init1 not initialized yet
> int t1 = tick("runFoo");
> int t2 = (int) INDY_foo().invokeExact();
> int t3 = tick("runFoo done");
> + assertEquals(Init1Tick, t2); // when Init1 was initialized
> assertEquals(t1+2, t3); // exactly two ticks in between
> assertEquals(t1+1, t2); // init happened inside
> return t2;
>
>
> — John
>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 9/20/13 1:38 AM, John Rose wrote:
>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 7:24 PM, John Rose <john.r.r...@oracle.com
>>> <mailto:john.r.r...@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please review this change for a change to the JSR 292 implementation:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/8024599/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> Summary: Align MH semantic with bytecode behavior of constructor and
>>>> static member accesses, regarding <clinit> invocation.
>>>>
>>>> The change is to javadoc and unit tests, documenting and testing some
>>>> corner cases of JSR 292 APIs.
>>>
>>> I have a reviewer (Alex Buckley) for the documentation changes, but I
>>> would also like a quick code review for the unit test.
>>>
>>> Also, there is a code insertion (predicated on a "false" symbolic
>>> constant) which serves to document the buggy JDK 7 behavior. I'm not
>>> particularly attached to it, so I'm open to either a yea or nay on
>>> keeping it. Leaning nay at the moment.
>>>
>>> — John
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mlvm-dev mailing list
>>> mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mlvm-dev mailing list
> mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
