On 01/11/21 7:26 am, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
Hello Alan,
On 01/11/21 1:03 am, Alan Bateman wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 04:19:21 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
Do you mean the jtreg `driver` style this test is using? I used it
because it was necessary to compare output (the hashCode value)
between
Hello Alan,
On 01/11/21 1:03 am, Alan Bateman wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 04:19:21 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
Do you mean the jtreg `driver` style this test is using? I used it because it
was necessary to compare output (the hashCode value) between multiple JVM runs.
I use the `driver` along
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 04:19:21 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Do you mean the jtreg `driver` style this test is using? I used it because it
> was necessary to compare output (the hashCode value) between multiple JVM
> runs. I use the `driver` along with the `ProcessBuilder` to capture the
> output
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 09:21:28 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this change which fixes the issue reported in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275509?
>>
>> The `ModuleDescriptor.hashCode()` method uses the hash code of its various
>> components to compute
On 28/10/2021 05:43, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
:
Hello Alan,
Looking at the CDS issue that's being tracked at
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275731, it's looking like a much
bigger change and might take a while. In the meantime do you think this test
case (and the fix to the hashCode()
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 10:33:42 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/module/ModuleDescriptor.java line 2559:
>>
>>> 2557: continue;
>>> 2558: }
>>> 2559: h += e.ordinal();
>>
>> This e == null check suggests there is an issue
> Can I please get a review for this change which fixes the issue reported in
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275509?
>
> The `ModuleDescriptor.hashCode()` method uses the hash code of its various
> components to compute the final hash code. While doing so it ends up calling
>
