It's a fine idea to remove these 2 classes and resurrect them when it
finds a need for it. I will file a JBS issue.
Mandy
On 8/15/20 2:34 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
You are right. For public Cleanable API, only the PhantomCleanable is
used currently. It is subclassed by CleanerImpl.Phanto
Hi,
You are right. For public Cleanable API, only the PhantomCleanable is
used currently. It is subclassed by CleanerImpl.PhantomCleanableRef to
implement the public API and also a couple of specialized internal
implementations. When the public Cleanable API was created, it was
thought that
* Florian Weimer:
> * Alan Bateman:
>
>> On 01/08/2020 10:23, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> Are jdk.internal.ref.SoftCleanable and jdk.internal.ref.WeakCleanable
>>> actually used?
>>>
>>> CleanerTest rests them, but I don't see any other mentions of these
>>> classes.
>
>> Do you mean used outside of
* Alan Bateman:
> On 01/08/2020 10:23, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Are jdk.internal.ref.SoftCleanable and jdk.internal.ref.WeakCleanable
>> actually used?
>>
>> CleanerTest rests them, but I don't see any other mentions of these
>> classes.
> Do you mean used outside of the cleaner implementation? M
On 01/08/2020 10:23, Florian Weimer wrote:
Are jdk.internal.ref.SoftCleanable and jdk.internal.ref.WeakCleanable
actually used?
CleanerTest rests them, but I don't see any other mentions of these
classes.
Do you mean used outside of the cleaner implementation? Maybe you are
looking to change th
Are jdk.internal.ref.SoftCleanable and jdk.internal.ref.WeakCleanable
actually used?
CleanerTest rests them, but I don't see any other mentions of these
classes.
