Please review this PR that intents to make sealed classes a final feature in
Java. This PR contains compiler and VM changes. In line with similar PRs, which
has made preview features final, this one is mostly removing preview related
comments from APIs plus options in test cases.
Thanks
--
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull request
On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 02:10:05 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Vicente,
>
> Hotspot and hotspot tests all look fine. One query: why was this test removed?
>
> test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/sealedClasses/AbstractSealedTest.java
>
> is that functionality tested elsewhere? (The other deleted test seemed
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull request
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:42:39 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> Compiler changes look good (I have not checked SymbolGenerator).
>
> Why were some tests removed?
thanks for the review. The removed tests were already covered in langtools
regression tests, so I only removed duplicated tests
---
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull reques
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull reques
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull request
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull reques
ases. Please also review the
> related [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265090)
>
> Thanks
>
> note: this PR is related to
> [PR-3528](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3528) and must be integrated
> after it.
Vicente Romero has updated the pull reques
On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 01:08:57 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
> Please review this PR that intents to make sealed classes a final feature in
> Java. This PR contains compiler and VM changes. In line with similar PRs,
> which has made preview features final, this one is mostly removin
On Tue, 18 May 2021 11:07:18 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> This patch allows Resolve to use more static diagnostic factories. Resolution
> errors support generation of diagnostics. This generation is very flexible
> and allows creating either a toplevel (error or warning) diagnostic, or a
On Wed, 26 May 2021 14:09:39 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> > Some general comments about the generated code. I wonder if it would make
> > sense to change the implementation of the toType() method which will fold
> > common cases in the switch expression into a default case or generate a
On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 09:46:31 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> This is a preview of a patch implementing JEP 406: Pattern Matching for
>> switch (Preview):
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213076
>>
>> The current draft of the specification is here:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/je
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 11:05:37 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> The ct.sym may contain classfiles referring to annotations that are not
> present in ct.sym (liek JDK's internal annotation `sun.misc.Contended`). If
> javac will try to load them (while discovering annotations for the purpose of
> detecting
Hi,
Please review this PR which is basically rewriting some redundant boolean
expressions in the compiler.
TIA
-
Commit messages:
- 8275771: JDK source code contains redundant boolean operations in
jdk.compiler and langtools
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6599/fi
looks good,
Vicente
On 9/18/19 7:33 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
The newly added tools/javac/options/BCPOrSystemNotSpecified.java test
is failing on Windows, so tier 1 is failing. I'd like to temporarily
problem list the test, so that it can be properly investigated:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net
ges?
This removal seems okay, but I found one additional reference:
./src/utils/IdealGraphVisualizer/nbproject/project.properties:auxiliary.org-netbeans-modules-apisupport-installer.pack200-enabled=false
Thanks,
David
-
On 21/11/2019 8:54 am, Vicente Romero wrote:
Hi,
I need a reviewer for t
please wait, I found some additional dependencies on module jdk.pack,
will submit another webrev, sorry
Vicente
On 11/21/19 2:53 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
Hi,
I think I have covered all the proposed fixes so far. This is the last
iteration of the webrev [1], all the current changes are in
, Vicente Romero wrote:
please wait, I found some additional dependencies on module jdk.pack,
will submit another webrev, sorry
Vicente
On 11/21/19 2:53 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
Hi,
I think I have covered all the proposed fixes so far. This is the
last iteration of the webrev [1], all the current
Hi all,
On 11/22/19 3:21 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 21/11/2019 19:53, Vicente Romero wrote:
Hi,
I think I have covered all the proposed fixes so far. This is the
last iteration of the webrev [1], all the current changes are in this
one, the code hasn't been split into different we
21 matches
Mail list logo
