On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:09:45 GMT, Rémi Forax
wrote:
>>> I think it's a bug in javac, it should not even raise a warning but an
>>> error.
>>> But the spec is not fully clear.
>>
>> If you think that it's a bug, consider providing feedback to authors of JEP
>> 394:
>>
>>> Other refinements
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:55:42 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> The enum constant is unused, and can be removed. The class is not an API.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 5e8e0ada
Author: Jan Lahoda
URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/5e8e0ada
Stats: 7 li
The enum constant is unused, and can be removed. The class is not an API.
-
Commit messages:
- 8242456: PreviewFeature.Feature enum removal of TEXT_BLOCKS
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2218/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk=2218=00
Issue:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:20:03 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> This is an update to javac and javadoc, to introduce support for Preview
> APIs, and generally improve javac and javadoc behavior to more closely adhere
> to JEP 12.
>
> The notable changes are:
>
> * adding sup
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java
On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 01:51:52 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 57 commits:
>>
>> - Fixing tests after a merge.
>> - Merging master into JD
On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:14 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 55 commits:
>>
>> - Merging recent master changes into JDK-8250768
>> - Fi
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
(used for tests, but
> seems like the proper thing to do anyway).
> -fixing the -Xprint annotation processor to print record component
> annotations.
>
> Changes to jdk.jdeps' classfile library are needed so that the ct.sym
> creation works.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull r
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 13:21:15 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Adding support for record classes in the historical data for ct.sym. This
> includes a few changes not strictly needed for the change:
> -updating and moving tests into test/langtools, so that it is easier to run
> them.
>
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 14:07:08 GMT, Harold Seigel wrote:
>> Please review this fix for JDK-8256867. This change no longer throws a
>> ClassFormatError exception when loading a class whose PermittedSubclasses
>> attribute is empty (contains no classes). Instead, the class is treated as
>> a
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:38:41 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Start of JDK 17 updates.
>
> Joe Darcy has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
> or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
> by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains eight
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 03:17:56 GMT, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
>> Start of JDK 17 updates.
>
> Marked as reviewed by mikael (Reviewer).
The langtools changes look fine to me. There were additions/changes to jcod
files under `test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/sealedClasses/` made under JDK-8246778,
so these
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 16:57:54 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> This pull request replaces https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1227.
>
> From the original PR:
>
>> Please review the code for the second iteration of sealed classes. In this
>> iteration we are:
>>
>>
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:25:04 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences
>> compared to the previous content of the PR.
>
> src/java.base
/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/sealed-classes-jvms.html)
>> [Additional: Contextual
>> Keywords](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/contextual-keywords-jls.html)
>
> This PR strives to reflect the review comments from 1227:
> * adjustments to javadoc
/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/sealed-classes-jvms.html)
>> [Additional: Contextual
>> Keywords](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/contextual-keywords-jls.html)
>
> This PR strives to reflect the review comments from 1227:
> * adjustments to
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:08:48 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>>> I suggest `Class::getPermittedSubclasses` to return a `non-null` array if
>>> this `Class` is sealed, i.e. this class is derived from a `class` file with
>>> the presence of `PermittedSubclasses` attribut
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 19:31:59 GMT, Dan Smith wrote:
>>> Additional changes may be needed to Class.permittedSubclasses() and/or
>>> Class.isSealed() as part of fixing bug JDK-8256867. The JVM is being
>>> changed to treat classes with empty PermittedSubclasses attributes as
>>> sealed classes
/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/sealed-classes-jvms.html)
>> [Additional: Contextual
>> Keywords](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/contextual-keywords-jls.html)
>
> This PR strives to reflect the review comments from 1227:
> * adjustments to javadoc
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:06:25 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> test/langtools/tools/javac/platform/createsymbols/CreateSymbolsTestImpl.java
>> line 513:
>>
>>> 511: public java.util.List
>>> l();
>>&
(used for tests, but
> seems like the proper thing to do anyway).
> -fixing the -Xprint annotation processor to print record component
> annotations.
>
> Changes to jdk.jdeps' classfile library are needed so that the ct.sym
> creation works.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pu
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:28:00 GMT, Harold Seigel wrote:
> Additional changes may be needed to Class.permittedSubclasses() and/or
> Class.isSealed() as part of fixing bug JDK-8256867. The JVM is being changed
> to treat classes with empty PermittedSubclasses attributes as sealed classes
> that
/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/sealed-classes-jvms.html)
>> [Additional: Contextual
>> Keywords](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/contextual-keywords-jls.html)
>
> This PR strives to reflect the review comments from 1227:
> * adjustments to javadoc
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 12:08:09 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> @lahodaj It is okay with me if `getPermittedSubclasses` returns the
>> permitted subtypes matching the runtime view (that matches the current
>> specification to me) and revisit this API as a follow up.
>
> Yes, would be a surprise if
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 00:36:54 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> The JVM method that returns the permitted subclasses (and interfaces) does
>> not weed out permitted subclasses based on the above module requirements.
>> It returns all the classes listed in the PermittedSubclasses attribute that
>> it
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 02:18:18 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixing tests on Windows - normalizing line endings.
>
> Looks mostly OK; some
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 01:43:47 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixing tests on Windows - normalizing line endings.
>
> test/langtools/tool
(used for tests, but
> seems like the proper thing to do anyway).
> -fixing the -Xprint annotation processor to print record component
> annotations.
>
> Changes to jdk.jdeps' classfile library are needed so that the ct.sym
> creation works.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pu
/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/sealed-classes-jvms.html)
>> [Additional: Contextual
>> Keywords](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbierman/jep397/jep397-20201104/specs/contextual-keywords-jls.html)
>
> This PR strives to reflect the review comments from 1227:
> * adjustments to javadoc
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 09:55:56 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 12 commits:
>>
>> - Improving getPermittedSubclasses javadoc.
>> - Merge br
(used for tests, but
> seems like the proper thing to do anyway).
> -fixing the -Xprint annotation processor to print record component
> annotations.
>
> Changes to jdk.jdeps' classfile library are needed so that the ct.sym
> creation works.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pu
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 12:17:46 GMT, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixing tests on Windows - normalizing line endings.
>
> make/langtools/src/class
(used for tests, but
> seems like the proper thing to do anyway).
> -fixing the -Xprint annotation processor to print record component
> annotations.
>
> Changes to jdk.jdeps' classfile library are needed so that the ct.sym
> creation works.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pu
This pull request replaces https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1227.
>From the original PR:
> Please review the code for the second iteration of sealed classes. In this
> iteration we are:
>
> * Enhancing narrowing reference conversion to allow for stricter checking
> of cast conversions
Adding support for record classes in the historical data for ct.sym. This
includes a few changes not strictly needed for the change:
-updating and moving tests into test/langtools, so that it is easier to run
them.
-fixing Record attribute reading in javac's ClassReader (used for tests, but
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:00:05 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> I agree. This @apiNote needs more clarification to help the readers to
>> understand the context here.One thing we could do in the Package class
>> description to add a "Package Sealing" section that can also explain that it
>> has
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.ja
r to go to the Preview
> page, the word DEPRECATED is highlighted in the top navbar instead of
> PREVIEW.
>
> -- Jon
>
>
> On 11/5/20 10:13 AM, mlbridge[bot] wrote:
>>
>> /Mailing list message from Alex Buckley
>> <mailto:alex.buck...@oracle.com> on
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 19:40:33 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> I have read all the files.
>>
>> I have added a n umber of various minor non-blocking comments (no need for
>> re-review( to fix these. But I have a couple of comments/questions before
>> finally giving
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:49:17 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> This is the current proposed patch for the upcoming JEP 394, for pattern
> matching for instanceof.
>
> A summary of changes:
> -making the feature permanent (non-preview)
> -making the binding variables non-fin
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:21:44 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 46 commits:
>>
>> - Removing trailing whitespace.
>> - Merging master into JDK
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
oses the VariableTree.
> The reason is better consistency in the API, with nodes like CatchTree,
> EnhancedForLoop Tree, etc.
>
> This change will not be integrated until JEP 394 is targetted.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:59:10 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 46 commits:
>>
>> - Removing trailing whitespace.
>> - Merging master into JDK
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:41:08 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 46 commits:
>>
>> - Removing trailing whitespace.
>> - Merging master into JDK
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:37:39 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 46 commits:
>>
>> - Removing trailing whitespace.
>> - Merging master into JDK
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:39:59 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 46 commits:
>>
>> - Removing trailing whitespace.
>> - Merging master into JDK
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:57:30 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Unqualified Elements.getTypeElement(CharSequence) and
> Elements.getPackageElement(CharSequence) search for elements across all
> modules in the module graph, and only return a value when they find exactly
>
the root modules, and would search the internals of
> other modules only if nothing would be found in the first round.
>
> The draft of the corresponding CSR is here:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8253168.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java.ne
oses the VariableTree.
> The reason is better consistency in the API, with nodes like CatchTree,
> EnhancedForLoop Tree, etc.
>
> This change will not be integrated until JEP 394 is targetted.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a
On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 16:11:18 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/util/Utils.java
>> line 2980:
>>
>>> 2978: }
>>> 2979:
>>> 2980: public enum DeclarationPreviewLanguageFeatures {
&
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 18:19:13 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Removing unnecessary cast.
>
> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/d
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:58:42 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Removing unnecessary cast.
>
> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 18:28:12 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Removing unnecessary cast.
>
> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/t
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:22:33 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Removing unnecessary cast.
>
> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:25:59 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 35 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8250768-dev' of https://github.com/lahodaj/
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.java
/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/test.javadoc.00/
> [6] https://bugs.openjdk.jav
oses the VariableTree.
> The reason is better consistency in the API, with nodes like CatchTree,
> EnhancedForLoop Tree, etc.
>
> This change will not be integrated until JEP 394 is targetted.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebas
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 03:13:34 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 15 addi
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 03:12:08 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 15 addi
oses the VariableTree.
> The reason is better consistency in the API, with nodes like CatchTree,
> EnhancedForLoop Tree, etc.
>
> This change will not be integrated until JEP 394 is targetted.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit si
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 03:11:28 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 15 addi
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 03:26:57 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> I believe plain jtreg invocations may not be always setting "-g". So
>> probably better to be explicitly clear we need -g, as the test itself
>> requires the debugging info/LocalVariableTable?
>
> sure I understand that the `-g` option
d encloses the VariableTree. The reason is better consistency in the API,
> with nodes like CatchTree, EnhancedForLoop
> Tree, etc.
>
> This change will not be integrated until JEP 394 is targetted.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a re
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:47:25 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now
>> contains 35 commits:
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8250768-dev' of https://github.com/lahodaj/
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/java.compiler/javax/lang/model/element/RecordComponentElement.html
> [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768/jdk.javadoc.00/api/preview-list.html
> [5]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8250768
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 03:09:27 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> This is the current proposed patch for the upcoming JEP 394, for pattern
>> matching for instanceof.
>>
>> A summary of changes:
>> -making the feature permanent (non-preview)
>> -making the binding variables non-final (as per current
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 03:02:03 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> This is the current proposed patch for the upcoming JEP 394, for pattern
>> matching for instanceof.
>>
>> A summary of changes:
>> -making the feature permanent (non-preview)
>> -making the binding variables non-final (as per current
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:22:17 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java
>> line 2238:
>>
>>> 2236: if (previewTree != null) {
>>> 2237: previewDiv.add(new
>>>
This is an update to javac and javadoc, to introduce support for Preview APIs,
and generally improve javac and javadoc
behavior to more closely adhere to JEP 12.
The notable changes are:
* adding support for Preview APIs (javac until now supported primarily only
preview language features, and
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 02:32:46 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Reflecting review comments - improving javadoc, avoid repeated search of
>> modules t
the root
> modules, and would search the internals
> of other modules only if nothing would be found in the first round. The
> draft of the corresponding CSR is here:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8253168.
Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a me
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 09:10:54 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
> This pull request is identical with the RFR previously sent for the Mercurial
> repository:
>
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/javadoc-dev/2020-August/001796.html
>
> I'm copy-pasting the comments from the original RFR
On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 08:18:11 GMT, Gilles Duboscq wrote:
> [JDK-8232806](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232806) introduced the
> jdk.internal.lambda.disableEagerInitialization system property to be able to
> disable eager initialization of lambda
> classes. This was necessary to
Hi Vicente,
javac changes look overall OK to me.
A few comments:
-the handling of non-sealed in JavacParser is fairly good, even though I
wonder if handling it in the tokenizer would not be better. If I read
the specification correctly, "non-sealed" is specified as a keyword, so
the
Hi Mandy,
Regarding the javac changes - should those be switched on/off depending
the Target? Or, if one compiles with e.g. --release 14, will the newly
generated output still work on JDK 14?
Jan
On 27. 03. 20 0:57, Mandy Chung wrote:
Please review the implementation of JEP 371: Hidden
Hi Vcente,
Overall, looks fine I think. A few comments on the javac implementation:
-in TypeEnter, I believe this:
memberEnter.memberEnter(tree.defs.diff(List.convert(JCTree.class,
defsBeforeAddingNewMembers)), env);
is unnecessary (and fairly slow). defsBeforeAddingNewMembers is
initialized
Looks good to me.
Jan
On 12. 11. 19 7:13, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hello,
To remove the need to modify tests when the JDK version is updated, the
tests of the preview API in String should use "${jdk.version}" as an
argument to -source rather than a fixed version string:
JDK-8233940: Preview
ev.00/test/langtools/tools/jdeps/listdeps/ListModuleDeps.java.udiff.html
Which you explained to me offline (we need to change this code every
time the compiler stops using the @Preview annotation - ugh). Nothing
specific to this webrev, so I approve.
Maurizio
On 21/10/2019 14:49, Jan Lahoda
).
I am afraid there is still a distinction between them - when --enable-preview
is not specified, use of essential APIs will lead to a compile time warning,
while use of non essential API (reflection, typically) only produces warnings.
Jan
>
>Maurizio
>
>On 16/10/2019 13:50, Jan Lahoda wro
l probably be correct :)
but I’d appreciate an explanation on how this dependency is guaranteed.
Or maybe I’m misunderstanding what this is supposed to do?
/Magnus
8 okt. 2019 kl. 17:27 skrev Jan Lahoda :
Thanks for the new code Erik!
A new webrev/patch that includes this better way of copyi
,
\
))
TARGETS += $(COPY_PREVIEW_FEATURES)
Then you automatically get all the corner case handling we have
implemented over the years for logging, making directories and copying
files. Your version is still correct for this case though.
/Erik
On 2019-10-03 02:57, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi
Jan,
For future work, consider having a "Preview Methods" tag alongside
static, instance, deprecated, etc.
Cheers,
-Joe
On 10/3/2019 2:57 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
This is a continuation of Joe's patch from here:
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2019-June/0
Hi,
This is a continuation of Joe's patch from here:
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2019-June/013498.html
APIs associated with preview features are split into two groups:
essential and non-essential. These are marked with an JDK-internal
annotation, PreviewFeature, and a
Done. I've changed the Compatibility Kind to "source" (as I guess it
better reflects the change, and the original CSR appears to have it as
well) and added "Language Construct" to Interface Kind.
Jan
On 2.1.2019 19:02, Jim Laskey wrote:
Looking for reviewers to make sure this CSR passes
I guess Jon's comment was that (per JLS) the outcome of unicode
unescapes can then participate in the escape sequences in String
literals. So, this:
"\u005ct"
is (as far as I know) a single character-literal (a tab), while it seems
that
`\u005ct`.unescape()
is two characters:
\t
Not sure
On 4.6.2018 19:40, mandy chung wrote:
Hi Jan,
On 5/31/18 2:11 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to upgrade the JOpt Simple library we are using to version
5.0.4.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203891
Complete webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8203891/webrev.00
On 4.6.2018 17:00, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 31/05/2018 10:11, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to upgrade the JOpt Simple library we are using to version
5.0.4.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203891
Complete webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8203891/webrev.00/complete
Hi,
I'd like to upgrade the JOpt Simple library we are using to version 5.0.4.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203891
Complete webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8203891/webrev.00/complete/
Delta webrev only showing (all) JDK changes in JOpt Simple and related
-the problem with automatically adding space after completion is resolved
-a few tweaks to tests
Does this look good?
Thanks,
Jan
On 29.5.2018 16:04, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
On 29.5.2018 14:51, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 25/05/2018 21:20, Jan Lahoda wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to upgrade the JLine used
:20 schrieb Jan Lahoda :
Hi,
I'd like to upgrade the JLine used by JShell and jjs from 2.12.1 to 2.14.6.
The complete webrev is here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8203827/webrev.00/complete/
To simplify reviewing, there is:
-an antipatch that removes the JDK-specific changes and restores
101 - 200 of 267 matches
Mail list logo
