On 24/06/2020 1:17 pm, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:48 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Mandy,
The trouble with small clarifications is that they tend to draw
attention to larger issues :)
On 24/06/2020 7:42 am, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 6/23/20 12:01 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Mandy,
There
On 6/23/20 7:48 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Mandy,
The trouble with small clarifications is that they tend to draw
attention to larger issues :)
On 24/06/2020 7:42 am, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 6/23/20 12:01 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Mandy,
There may be a missing "to" in:
+ *
Hi Mandy,
The trouble with small clarifications is that they tend to draw
attention to larger issues :)
On 24/06/2020 7:42 am, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 6/23/20 12:01 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Mandy,
There may be a missing "to" in:
+ * Platform classes are visible the platform class
Hello,
As a general comment, over time we come to regard specifications like
"if these three pre-conditions of the method are all violated, this
exception will be thrown; if only these two pre-conditions are violated,
this other exception will be thrown" as over specifications and best
Hi Gilles,
Additional comments:
215 try {
216 return new
ConstantCallSite(Lookup.IMPL_LOOKUP.findStaticGetter(innerClass,
LAMBDA_INSTANCE_FIELD, invokedType.returnType()));
217 } catch (ReflectiveOperationException e) {
218 throw new LambdaConversionException("Exception finding constructor",
Thanks, Brian and Lance.
I forgot to update the copyright year. Pushed the changeset with the
year update.
Naoto
On 6/23/20 3:09 PM, Lance Andersen wrote:
+1
Best
Lance
--
Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
Oracle Java Engineering
1
looks good
/Andy
On 6/23/2020 1:53 PM, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
Please review fix [2] for jpackage bug [1].
Fix how icon is configured for installers on Windows. The value of
ARPPRODUCTICON property should point to an entry in Icon table of msi
rather to a path of icon file in install
Hi Alexey,
Looks good.
Thanks,
Alexander
On 6/23/20 10:53 AM, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
Please review fix [2] for jpackage bug [1].
Fix how icon is configured for installers on Windows. The value of
ARPPRODUCTICON property should point to an entry in Icon table of msi
rather to a path of icon
+1
Best
Lance
--
Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
Oracle Java Engineering
1 Network Drive
Burlington, MA 01803
lance.ander...@oracle.com
> On Jun 23, 2020, at 5:44 PM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please review this
Hi Naoto,
+1
Brian
> On Jun 23, 2020, at 2:44 PM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please review this small doc fix for the following issue:
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248184
>
> The proposed patch is here:
>
> ---
Hi,
Please review this small doc fix for the following issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248184
The proposed patch is here:
--- old/src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/temporal/ChronoField.java
2020-06-23 14:43:43.0 -0700
+++
On 6/23/20 12:01 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Mandy,
There may be a missing "to" in:
+ * Platform classes are visible the platform class loader
++ * Platform classes are visible *via* the platform
class loader
I caught this accidental change too.
The second change seems to be
On 6/23/20 11:38 AM, Brian Goetz wrote:
On 6/23/2020 2:08 PM, Gilles Duboscq wrote:
In 8232806, a system property was introduce to disable eager
initialization of the classes generated by the
InnerClassLambdaMetafactory
(`jdk.internal.lambda.disableEagerInitialization`).
However, when
On 6/23/20 12:15 PM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi, Mandy
For:
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@
* The system class loader is typically used to define classes on
the
* application class path, module path, and JDK-specific tools.
* The platform class loader is a parent or an ancestor of
Hi, Mandy
For:
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@
* The system class loader is typically used to define classes on the
* application class path, module path, and JDK-specific tools.
* The platform class loader is a parent or an ancestor of the
system class
- * loader that all platform
Hi Mandy,
There may be a missing "to" in:
+ * Platform classes are visible the platform class loader
++ * Platform classes are visible *via* the platform class
loader
The second change seems to be self referential using "parent" to define
itself.
And pre-existing in the
On 6/23/2020 2:08 PM, Gilles Duboscq wrote:
In 8232806, a system property was introduce to disable eager initialization of
the classes generated by the InnerClassLambdaMetafactory
(`jdk.internal.lambda.disableEagerInitialization`).
However, when `disableEagerInitialization` is true, even
On 23/06/2020 19:03, Mandy Chung wrote:
Small clarification about the parent of the system class loader in the
ClassLoader class
spec:
diff --git a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
---
In 8232806, a system property was introduce to disable eager initialization of
the classes generated by the InnerClassLambdaMetafactory
(`jdk.internal.lambda.disableEagerInitialization`).
However, when `disableEagerInitialization` is true, even for non-capturing
lambdas, the capturing lambda
Small clarification about the parent of the system class loader in the
ClassLoader class
spec:
diff --git a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
+++
Please review fix [2] for jpackage bug [1].
Fix how icon is configured for installers on Windows. The value of
ARPPRODUCTICON property should point to an entry in Icon table of msi
rather to a path of icon file in install directory. The issue shows up
only in downgrade scenarios.
- Alexey
Hi Alan, Mandy,
thanks for reviewing.
I've ran all java/lang/instrument and the com/sun/tools/attach/modules
tests, as well as added tier2 to the testing mix.
/Claes
On 2020-06-23 16:09, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 23/06/2020 09:56, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
the current implementation of
> On 23 Jun 2020, at 14:49, Peter Levart wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Ok, I'm going to push this to jdk15.
Thank you Peter. This is a really nice change.
As a follow on, and not for JDK 15, I observe that Class::isRecord0 /
JVM_IsRecord shows up as consuming a significant amount of time, more than
On 6/23/20 1:56 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
the current implementation of ServicesCatalog uses an internal providers
method, which is only used to add ServiceProviders.
Providing an addProviders method instead means we can streamline this,
to the tune of a very small startup win.
Bug:
OK, I'll avoid the checks in the patch intended for general publication
but will add them separately just to see which of current tests would fail.
I'll then later open a separate issue for discussing a possible
extension of the API and a possible CSR.
Greetings
Raffaello
On 2020-06-23
Hi,
This is a case where having some more interoperability testing could be
informative
though there are likely many adhoc Base64 encoders and its not practical
to test
against them.
Introducing a new mode or option creates an undesirable fuzzyness to the
API.
It won't help existing uses
Hi Raffaello,
Exceptions related to the arguments should be highest priority so they are
not obscured by any more dynamic state related to the stream.
There's no specific order between checks of the arguments,
though in this case the NPE would naturally occur before IOOBE.
There are more
When there is a choice of exceptions to be thrown, it's not usually
specified which one wins.
Usually there's a natural order of operations that cause e.g. argument
checking to happen first.
Sometimes a code change can cause a different exception to be thrown,
and that occasionally causes
Hi Roger,
I didn't yet implement the strict check since, as you point out, it
could harm existing code in the wild, even if the OpenJDK test would all
pass.
That's why I'm wondering if it would make sense to extend the existing
API to have the check as an additional option.
Greetings
Hi,
the InputStream.read(byte[], int, int) method [1] can throw
* IOException
* NullPointerException
* IndexOutOfBoundsException
Is there a recommended priority for the conditions associated to the
exceptions to be checked? For example, if the arguments are invalid and
the stream is already
Hi Raffaello,
I think the concern over accepting non-canonical encodings would be
compatibility.
It would rude to implement the strictness and have applications start
failing.
But it is likely an oversight since existing code checks for other
invalid encodings.
Do any of the existing tests
On 23/06/2020 09:56, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
the current implementation of ServicesCatalog uses an internal providers
method, which is only used to add ServiceProviders.
Providing an addProviders method instead means we can streamline this,
to the tune of a very small startup win.
Bug:
On 6/23/20 2:47 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 23 Jun 2020, at 10:46, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 23 Jun 2020, at 10:17, Peter Levart wrote:
...
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.08/
Good stuff. Reviewed.
I am going to take this latest change and run
Hi,
in defense of the current spec, integer arithmetic is signed by default
and unsigned behavior is evident from the method names, like
Long::compareUnsigned or Long::divideUnsigned
But your spec is even clearer ;-)
Greetings
Raffaello
In retrospect I don't know why I expected
In retrospect I don't know why I expected Math.multiplyHigh() to
return the high word of the unsigned product of two 64-bit numbers,
given that long is signed; in my defence however, the docs don't
actually seem to specify.
WDYT about a patch like this to clarify?
diff --git
Hi,
RFC 4648, in section "3.5. Canonical Encoding", prescribes that pad bits
must be set to zero.
However, the current decoder implementation in java.util.Base64 accepts
non-canonical encodings as well. For example, all of the following four
encodings
KCk=
KCl=
KCm=
KCn=
where only the
> On 23 Jun 2020, at 10:46, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 23 Jun 2020, at 10:17, Peter Levart wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.08/
>
> Good stuff. Reviewed.
>
> I am going to take this latest change and run it through our
> On 23 Jun 2020, at 10:17, Peter Levart wrote:
>
> ...
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.08/
Good stuff. Reviewed.
I am going to take this latest change and run it through our internal build and
test system. Will post the results here soon.
On 2020-06-23 11:17, Peter Levart wrote:
Including build-dev since this patch is adding new issue 8248135:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248135
So here's new webrev with a patch for building benchmarks with
--enable-preview included:
Thanks, Magnus.
Peter
On 6/23/20 11:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2020-06-23 11:17, Peter Levart wrote:
Including build-dev since this patch is adding new issue 8248135:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248135
So here's new webrev with a patch for building benchmarks with
Looks good to me!
/Claes
On 2020-06-23 11:17, Peter Levart wrote:
Including build-dev since this patch is adding new issue 8248135:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248135
So here's new webrev with a patch for building benchmarks with
--enable-preview included:
Including build-dev since this patch is adding new issue 8248135:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248135
So here's new webrev with a patch for building benchmarks with
--enable-preview included:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.08/
Hi,
the current implementation of ServicesCatalog uses an internal providers
method, which is only used to add ServiceProviders.
Providing an addProviders method instead means we can streamline this,
to the tune of a very small startup win.
Bug:
On 2020-06-23 10:06, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
On 2020-06-23 09:49, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi Chris, Claes,
Ok then, here's with benchmark included:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.07/
I haven't been able to run the benchmark with "make test"
Hi,
On 2020-06-23 09:49, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi Chris, Claes,
Ok then, here's with benchmark included:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.07/
I haven't been able to run the benchmark with "make test" though. I have
tried various ways to pass javac
Hi Chris, Claes,
Ok then, here's with benchmark included:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/RecordsDeserialization/webrev.07/
I haven't been able to run the benchmark with "make test" though. I have
tried various ways to pass javac options to build like:
make test
46 matches
Mail list logo
