Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-13 Thread Patrick Reinhart 

Hi  Jonathan,

On 2016-09-13 02:13, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:

Hi Patrick,

Thank you very much for the offer to hold my patch for me!


No problem.



Is it common practice to send patches to others using PGP?



No, this is my personal setting.


Kind regards,
Jonathan

On 12 September 2016 at 21:08, Patrick Reinhart  
wrote:



Hi Jonathan,

As just also wanted to help some more clean-up in the JDKs final 
phase, I
could offer you to hold that patch. Just send it to me and I will 
prepare

the webrev for you….

-Patrick



-Patrick

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-12 Thread Jonathan Bluett-Duncan 
Hi Patrick,

Thank you very much for the offer to hold my patch for me!

Is it common practice to send patches to others using PGP?

Kind regards,
Jonathan

On 12 September 2016 at 21:08, Patrick Reinhart  wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> As just also wanted to help some more clean-up in the JDKs final phase, I
> could offer you to hold that patch. Just send it to me and I will prepare
> the webrev for you….
>
> -Patrick
>
>
> > Am 12.09.2016 um 20:36 schrieb Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
> jbluettdun...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Thanks for letting me know about the attachment stripping behaviour, and
> > reminding me about the current state of the JDK 9 release schedule.
> >
> > Stuart, would you be happy to host my patch on cr.openjdk.java.net? If
> not,
> > do you know who else might be happy to host it for me? Or alternatively,
> > would you prefer I wait until development of Java 9 Updates and/or Java
> 10
> > starts?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Jonathan
> >
> > On 12 September 2016 at 01:50, David Holmes 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jonathon,
> >>
> >> Attachments get stripped from most of the mailing lists so you will need
> >> to find someone to host these for you on cr.openjdk.java.net.
> >>
> >> That aside you may be hard pressed to find anyone who can look at this
> >> future work now, given where things are with the JDK 9 release schedule.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/09/2016 9:42 AM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Would you kindly review this patch to replace existing uses of
> >>> Collections.unmodifiable*(*Arrays.asList(*)) and plain
> Arrays.asList(*)
> >>> with (List|Set|Map).of(*). You may find the patch files in the
> >>> attachments.
> >>>
> >>> My rationale for replacing uses of Collections.unmodifiable*... with
> >>> (List|Set|Map).of is to make use of the memory savings allowed by the
> >>> newer
> >>> APIs.
> >>>
> >>> The general rationale for replacing the Arrays.asList calls I've
> touched
> >>> is
> >>> to again make use of memory savings, but this may be naive or misguided
> >>> reasoning on my part, as Arrays.asList may or may not be more
> >>> memory-efficient than List.of. However, where I've replaced
> Arrays.asList
> >>> for List.of in FileTreeIterator, my reasoning for doing so instead was
> to
> >>> help prevent TOCTOU attacks, but again this may be misguided on my
> part.
> >>>
> >>> It doesn't seem practical to me to include new unit tests, as these are
> >>> mainly performance improvements, but if it's believed that new unit
> tests
> >>> are needed, then I'd be happy to go back and try to include some.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>> Jonathan
> >>>
> >>>
>
>

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-12 Thread Patrick Reinhart 
Hi Jonathan,

As just also wanted to help some more clean-up in the JDKs final phase, I could 
offer you to hold that patch. Just send it to me and I will prepare the webrev 
for you….

-Patrick


> Am 12.09.2016 um 20:36 schrieb Jonathan Bluett-Duncan 
> :
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> Thanks for letting me know about the attachment stripping behaviour, and
> reminding me about the current state of the JDK 9 release schedule.
> 
> Stuart, would you be happy to host my patch on cr.openjdk.java.net? If not,
> do you know who else might be happy to host it for me? Or alternatively,
> would you prefer I wait until development of Java 9 Updates and/or Java 10
> starts?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Jonathan
> 
> On 12 September 2016 at 01:50, David Holmes  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jonathon,
>> 
>> Attachments get stripped from most of the mailing lists so you will need
>> to find someone to host these for you on cr.openjdk.java.net.
>> 
>> That aside you may be hard pressed to find anyone who can look at this
>> future work now, given where things are with the JDK 9 release schedule.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> David
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/09/2016 9:42 AM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Would you kindly review this patch to replace existing uses of
>>> Collections.unmodifiable*(*Arrays.asList(*)) and plain Arrays.asList(*)
>>> with (List|Set|Map).of(*). You may find the patch files in the
>>> attachments.
>>> 
>>> My rationale for replacing uses of Collections.unmodifiable*... with
>>> (List|Set|Map).of is to make use of the memory savings allowed by the
>>> newer
>>> APIs.
>>> 
>>> The general rationale for replacing the Arrays.asList calls I've touched
>>> is
>>> to again make use of memory savings, but this may be naive or misguided
>>> reasoning on my part, as Arrays.asList may or may not be more
>>> memory-efficient than List.of. However, where I've replaced Arrays.asList
>>> for List.of in FileTreeIterator, my reasoning for doing so instead was to
>>> help prevent TOCTOU attacks, but again this may be misguided on my part.
>>> 
>>> It doesn't seem practical to me to include new unit tests, as these are
>>> mainly performance improvements, but if it's believed that new unit tests
>>> are needed, then I'd be happy to go back and try to include some.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Jonathan
>>> 
>>>

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-12 Thread Jonathan Bluett-Duncan 
Hi David,

Thanks for letting me know about the attachment stripping behaviour, and
reminding me about the current state of the JDK 9 release schedule.

Stuart, would you be happy to host my patch on cr.openjdk.java.net? If not,
do you know who else might be happy to host it for me? Or alternatively,
would you prefer I wait until development of Java 9 Updates and/or Java 10
starts?

Kind regards,
Jonathan

On 12 September 2016 at 01:50, David Holmes  wrote:

> Hi Jonathon,
>
> Attachments get stripped from most of the mailing lists so you will need
> to find someone to host these for you on cr.openjdk.java.net.
>
> That aside you may be hard pressed to find anyone who can look at this
> future work now, given where things are with the JDK 9 release schedule.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
> On 11/09/2016 9:42 AM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Would you kindly review this patch to replace existing uses of
>> Collections.unmodifiable*(*Arrays.asList(*)) and plain Arrays.asList(*)
>> with (List|Set|Map).of(*). You may find the patch files in the
>> attachments.
>>
>> My rationale for replacing uses of Collections.unmodifiable*... with
>> (List|Set|Map).of is to make use of the memory savings allowed by the
>> newer
>> APIs.
>>
>> The general rationale for replacing the Arrays.asList calls I've touched
>> is
>> to again make use of memory savings, but this may be naive or misguided
>> reasoning on my part, as Arrays.asList may or may not be more
>> memory-efficient than List.of. However, where I've replaced Arrays.asList
>> for List.of in FileTreeIterator, my reasoning for doing so instead was to
>> help prevent TOCTOU attacks, but again this may be misguided on my part.
>>
>> It doesn't seem practical to me to include new unit tests, as these are
>> mainly performance improvements, but if it's believed that new unit tests
>> are needed, then I'd be happy to go back and try to include some.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-11 Thread David Holmes 

Hi Jonathon,

Attachments get stripped from most of the mailing lists so you will need 
to find someone to host these for you on cr.openjdk.java.net.


That aside you may be hard pressed to find anyone who can look at this 
future work now, given where things are with the JDK 9 release schedule.


Cheers,
David

On 11/09/2016 9:42 AM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:

Hi all,

Would you kindly review this patch to replace existing uses of
Collections.unmodifiable*(*Arrays.asList(*)) and plain Arrays.asList(*)
with (List|Set|Map).of(*). You may find the patch files in the attachments.

My rationale for replacing uses of Collections.unmodifiable*... with
(List|Set|Map).of is to make use of the memory savings allowed by the newer
APIs.

The general rationale for replacing the Arrays.asList calls I've touched is
to again make use of memory savings, but this may be naive or misguided
reasoning on my part, as Arrays.asList may or may not be more
memory-efficient than List.of. However, where I've replaced Arrays.asList
for List.of in FileTreeIterator, my reasoning for doing so instead was to
help prevent TOCTOU attacks, but again this may be misguided on my part.

It doesn't seem practical to me to include new unit tests, as these are
mainly performance improvements, but if it's believed that new unit tests
are needed, then I'd be happy to go back and try to include some.

Kind regards,
Jonathan

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-10 Thread Jonathan Bluett-Duncan 
Sorry, it seems Gmail is not cooperating with me...

If anyone does need to see the patches in-body, then I'd be happy to inline
them directly in a reply, but that wouldn't be ideal since there are 18 of
them in total... :/

On 11 September 2016 at 00:54, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
jbluettdun...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Oops, it didn't fully register for me that I actually needed to include
> attachments in the body! So here they are again, this time in the body
> (hopefully).
>

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

2016-09-10 Thread Jonathan Bluett-Duncan 
Oops, it didn't fully register for me that I actually needed to include
attachments in the body! So here they are again, this time in the body
(hopefully).