On 12/11/2012 04:41 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
On JDK 8 with your patches, we are loading around 4750 classes and
there are, as expected, 0 define races (I believe, however, that we're
getting a false count though whenever defineClass() returns an
already-defined class - it would be nice if
On 12/11/2012 03:55 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Question on the source code: registerAsFullyConcurrent has confusing
comment -
do the super classes all need to be parallel capable? Or do the super
classes all need
to be FullyConcurrent? I assume the latter, so just fix the comments.
Actually it
On 11/12/2012 7:20 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/11/2012 03:55 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Question on the source code: registerAsFullyConcurrent has confusing
comment -
do the super classes all need to be parallel capable? Or do the super
classes all need
to be FullyConcurrent? I assume the
Hi again,
There might be a middle-ground variant. No registration API changes as
described below. When ClassLoader X declares that it is fully-concurrent
make it fully-concurrent. But if any superclass registered as only
parallel-capable, provide getClassLoadingLock() locks nevertheless. Only
On 12/11/2012 10:29 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 11/12/2012 7:20 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/11/2012 03:55 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Question on the source code: registerAsFullyConcurrent has confusing
comment -
do the super classes all need to be parallel capable? Or do the super
classes all
Peter,
You are convincing me that all superclasses must be fully concurrent
too. Otherwise we are just trying to second-guess a whole bunch of
what-ifs. :)
Thanks,
David
On 11/12/2012 7:44 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/11/2012 10:29 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 11/12/2012 7:20 PM, Peter
Joe sent me an update with changes to address issues discussed so far,
I've put the webrev here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8004371/webrev.02/
Joe - the classes you sent me were in different packages, also the
formatting was a bit messed up in several classes, I've fixed up those
On 10/12/2012 21:59, Mike Duigou wrote:
:
Adding public was at my suggestion.
It seems inconsistent to me to have it on the default methods. Perhaps this has
been discussed before, in which case ignore this. BTW: The only reason I'm
bringing this up is because there are lots of default
On 10/12/2012 17:12, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi,
After further discussion with Joe Alan, I changed the call
to ServiceLoader to simply return the first provider it finds,
or null.
This is closer to what was present in JDK 7 - and looping is
not necessary in JDK 8 since the default implementation
On 12/11/12 2:01 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 10/12/2012 17:12, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
[...]
So here is a new - and hopefully simpler webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/JDK-7169894/javax.xml.parsers/webrev.04/
best regards,
-- daniel
This looks fine to me, just a stray p/p at L64.
Need a reviewer for 8004357:Implement various methods in
SerialBlob/Clob/Array and specify Thread Safety
This defines thread safety adds missing methods to SerialBlob/Clob/Array
The CCC request has been reviewed. The changes uncovered a couple of bugs in
the JCK which the JCK team is
On 12/11/2012 02:12 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/11/2012 04:41 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
On JDK 8 with your patches, we are loading around 4750 classes and
there are, as expected, 0 define races (I believe, however, that we're
getting a false count though whenever defineClass() returns an
hg diff Base64.java
diff -r d206e52bf8a6 src/share/classes/java/util/Base64.java
--- a/src/share/classes/java/util/Base64.java Tue Dec 11 13:14:56 2012
+0800
+++ b/src/share/classes/java/util/Base64.java Tue Dec 11 18:05:30 2012
+
@@ -289,8 +289,8 @@ public class Base64 {
*
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akhil/8004201.3/webrev/
- removed these operators on Byte and Short
- javadoc improvements based on CCC review
On 12/10/2012 03:45 PM, Akhil Arora wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akhil/8004201.2/webrev/
- replaced Suitable for conversion as a method reference to
A bit more cleanup as suggested:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgish/Bug8004651-CheckLockLocationTest-Windows-delete-file-fix/
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejgish/Bug8004651-CheckLockLocationTest-Windows-delete-file-fix/
Thanks,
Jim
On 12/10/2012 07:47 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi Jim,
Alan,
Looks good to me. Duplicating the Beans supporting class is fine as
they will be removed when the deprecated addPropertyChangeListener and
removePropertyChangeListener methods are removed in a future release.
Mandy
On 12/11/12 11:55 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Those tracking the work
Changeset: c4bd81de2868
Author:akhil
Date: 2012-12-11 15:33 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/c4bd81de2868
8003246: Add InitialValue Supplier to ThreadLocal
Reviewed-by: mduigou, forax, dl, chegar, briangoetz
! src/share/classes/java/lang/ThreadLocal.java
+
Looks good!
Do you need someone to push this for you?
s'marks
On 12/11/12 3:04 PM, Jim Gish wrote:
A bit more cleanup as suggested:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgish/Bug8004651-CheckLockLocationTest-Windows-delete-file-fix/
Looks fine; approved,
-Joe
On 12/11/2012 03:53 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi all,
Please review the following gigantic webrev [1] to clean up @build
tags in RMI tests. Details underlying this change are in the bug
report [2].
Briefly, if test classes listed in @build tags are in the wrong
On 12/12/2012 1:10 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
No problem. What do you mean by instrumentation?
Any means of seeing when parallel define class actually occurred:
- -verbose:class logging ?
- jvmstat counter ?
- -XX:+TraceParallelDefine ?
- ???
Thanks,
David
On 12/10/2012 11:18 PM, David
On 11/12/2012 9:58 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/11/2012 12:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Peter,
You are convincing me that all superclasses must be fully concurrent
too. Otherwise we are just trying to second-guess a whole bunch of
what-ifs. :)
If you think some more, yes. The superclass might
Ah, well for our concurrent class loader we just keep simple counters
for all that stuff. If we can boost that up to the ClassLoader level
that'd be nifty. The stats we track that have been useful are:
- Number of defined classes
- Number of 'races' i.e. define when already existent
- Number
Looks fine with me.
I notice that there are cases that still require @build the main class
when it contains the source for other interfaces/classes that another
class depends on - not a problem.
Mandy
On 12/11/2012 3:53 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi all,
Please review the following gigantic
Hi Alan,
This decoupling looks fine to me.
David
On 12/12/2012 5:55 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Those tracking the work to get us to a modular JDK will know that the
java.beans package is highly problematic.
For the core modules then j.u.l.LogManager and j.u.jar.Pack200 have
support for
Changeset: 6c795437f212
Author:mduigou
Date: 2012-12-11 20:49 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/6c795437f212
8004905: Correct license of test to remove classpath exception
Reviewed-by: akhil
! test/java/lang/ThreadLocal/ThreadLocalSupplierTest.java
I haven't build on solaris-i586 for some time and see a failure today in
make/sun/cldr. The Makefile [1] has these lines:
75 for dir in $(GENSRCDIR); do \
76 if [ -d $$dir ] ; then \
77 ( $(CD) $$dir; \
78
26 matches
Mail list logo
