Re: [9] RFR: 8177314: java VM fails to start with a Japanese ShiftJIS locale

On 17/04/2017 20:47, Naoto Sato wrote: Hi, Please review the fix for the following issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177314 The proposed change is located at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8177314/webrev.00/ The change is to move SJIS based encodings into java.base module

RFR: 8178889: Move creation of AbstractChronology comparators to call sites

Hi, in AbstractChronology we define a number of comparators which could be moved to their respective call site and thus be lazily initialized when needed with no performance penalty. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178889 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8178889/jdk

Re: RFR: 8178889: Move creation of AbstractChronology comparators to call sites

Hi Claes, Looks fine Roger On 4/18/2017 8:28 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, in AbstractChronology we define a number of comparators which could be moved to their respective call site and thus be lazily initialized when needed with no performance penalty. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/

Re: [9] RFR: 8177314: java VM fails to start with a Japanese ShiftJIS locale

Hi Alan, On 4/18/17 12:42 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: The change is to move SJIS based encodings into java.base module on Linux so that SJIS locale can be used as the default locale to start the JVM. Although they are not the default locale in Linux distributions, they still seem to be widely used.

Re: [9] RFR(S): 8178726: Can't load classes from classpath if it is a UNC share

Hi Alan, Chris, thanks for your help and feedback. It seems my fix was indeed "too optimistic". I've only briefly looked into the errors reported by Chris. The first one is due to a cyclic dependency between Paths.get() and FileSystems.getDefault(). So I've finally decided to go with Alan's propo

Re: RFR [9] 8177738: Runtime.Version must be a value-based class

Hi Pavel, These changes look fine. I think you can update the JEP to match the updated patterns mentioned below. Regards, Roger On 4/3/2017 7:50 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On 3 Apr 2017, at 16:40, Pavel Rappo wrote: On 3 Apr 2017, at 20:39, Paul Sandoz wrote: Hi, 962 * [1-9][0-9]*((\.0)

RFR: 8178910 Problemlist sample tests

Hi. Could you please review a quick fix to temporarily disable a couple of tests: $ hg diff ProblemList.txt diff --git a/test/ProblemList.txt b/test/ProblemList.txt --- a/test/ProblemList.txt +++ b/test/ProblemList.txt @@ -308,4 +308,7 @@ org/omg/CORBA/OrbPropertiesTest.java

Re: RFR: 8178910 Problemlist sample tests

Looks fine Shura; thanks, -Joe On 4/18/2017 11:19 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Hi. Could you please review a quick fix to temporarily disable a couple of tests: $ hg diff ProblemList.txt diff --git a/test/ProblemList.txt b/test/ProblemList.txt --- a/test/ProblemList.txt +++ b/test/Prob

Re: RFR: 8178910 Problemlist sample tests

+1 > On Apr 18, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline > wrote: > > Hi. > > Could you please review a quick fix to temporarily disable a couple of tests: > > $ hg diff ProblemList.txt > diff --git a/test/ProblemList.txt b/test/ProblemList.txt > --- a/test/ProblemList.txt > +++ b/test/Probl

RFR: 8076417: Update test/jdk/asm/AsmSanity.java with modules

Hello, Please review [1] which addresses bug [2]. This test is unnecessary, as there are other components and tests within the jdk, which will fail if ASM is not included, therefore this test is removed. Thanks Kumar [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8076417/webrev.00/ [2] https://bugs.

JDK 9 RFR(s): 8167981: Optional: add notes explaining intended use

Hi all, Please review this small set of non-normative documentation changes for java.util.Optional and related classes. The notes describe the primary intent of Optional to be used as a return value, and recommend avoiding using null as the value of a variable of Optional type. Also, a note

Re: RFR: 8076417: Update test/jdk/asm/AsmSanity.java with modules

+1 -Sundar On 19/04/17, 12:09 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote: Hello, Please review [1] which addresses bug [2]. This test is unnecessary, as there are other components and tests within the jdk, which will fail if ASM is not included, therefore this test is removed. Thanks Kumar [1] http://cr.

Re: JDK 9 RFR(s): 8167981: Optional: add notes explaining intended use

+ * The methods {@link #orElse(java.lang.Object) orElse()} and It's sad that in 2017 we still can't write {@link #orElse(T)} ... but ... we can and should write {@link #orElse(Object) orElse(T)} making the source and html more readable (orElse is not nullary) + * {@code OptionalDouble} is pri

Re: RFR: 8076417: Update test/jdk/asm/AsmSanity.java with modules

Hi, Kumar As the removed test is the only one test under jdk/asm, it needs to be removed from jdk_other test group: --- a/test/TEST.groups +++ b/test/TEST.groups @@ -269,7 +269,6 @@ javax/transaction \ javax/xml \ -javax/xml/crypto \ -jdk/asm \ Thanks, Amy On 4/19/17 2:39

"unsafe" instances in sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystem

While reading the code for sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystemProvider and sun.nio.fs.WindowsUserDefinedFileAttributeView, I noticed that there is a private static variable to the Unsafe instance but it doesn't seems to be used anywhere in the code - am I missing something here or should I propose a pa

Re: "unsafe" instances in sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystem

On 19/04/2017 05:44, Chan, Sunny wrote: While reading the code for sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystemProvider and sun.nio.fs.WindowsUserDefinedFileAttributeView, I noticed that there is a private static variable to the Unsafe instance but it doesn't seems to be used anywhere in the code - am I miss