On Mar 9, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/09/2015 04:59 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Mar 9, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/09/2015 03:10 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Do you want to tackle the single-address access methods as a follow up
On Mar 6, 2015, at 7:58 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
2) I know there has been a lot of discussion about the use of CF,
but I have a few more comments:
a) Both onExit and onProcessExit are implemented to unconditionally
throw UOE. Is the intention to make
Sorry for the late reply, getting through email backlogs...
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/27/2015 06:16 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Feb 27, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
I really don't think this tooling support
Hi Andrew,
On Mar 11, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/11/2015 07:10 AM, John Rose wrote:
John: I'm waiting for an answer to my question here before I submit
a webrev for approval.
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/panama-dev/2015-March/99.html
/
Thanks Paul Sandoz for sponsoring this.
This looks good. Code is nicely contained and not as much as i initially
anticipated.
I am pondering adding an api note to the count methods to head off any suprises
as now the stream pipeline may not be executed.
* @apiNote
* An implementation may
On Mar 11, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/11/2015 07:10 AM, John Rose wrote:
John: I'm waiting for an answer to my question here before I submit
a webrev for approval.
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/panama-dev/2015-March/99.html
(Answered.)
On Mar 10, 2015, at 3:16 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
On 3/10/2015 5:50 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Mar 6, 2015, at 7:58 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
2) I know there has been a lot of discussion about the use of CF,
but I have a few more comments
Hi Brent,
On the Map.compute* methods.
Perhaps we can reuse similar language to that we added for Matcher:
The mapping function should not modify this map during computation. This
method will, on a best-effort basis, throw a
ConcurrentModification if such modification is detected.
It's
On Mar 11, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
I still think that conflates the OS says no and the Subtype of Process
does not support the contract of ProcessHandle.
Process as designed feels kind of limited and we are stuck with that.
ProcessHandle is then
On Mar 11, 2015, at 12:12 PM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
CFProcess onProcessExit() { ... } // crappy default
I don't know. There are two ways to get that behaviour then.
Process.onProcessExit() and Process.toHandle().onExit(). If Process is not a
subtype of
On Mar 11, 2015, at 12:34 AM, Brent Christian brent.christ...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi, Paul
On 3/10/15 8:29 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On the Map.compute* methods.
Perhaps we can reuse similar language to that we added for Matcher:
* The mapping function should not modify this map during
On Mar 10, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
I agree with Andrew that the Unsafe API matters, and there are many
implementations of it (even multiple within openjdk itself!).
I still know of no reason why my proposed spec is wrong. If C11 support was
good and
On Mar 13, 2015, at 11:34 AM, Amy Lu amy...@oracle.com wrote:
Testcase testFlatMappingClose was newly introduced in JDK-8071600 in
CollectorsTest, this test should be marked as serialization-hostile (such
tests will ignored by by lambda serialization testing framework).
bug:
On Mar 12, 2015, at 1:07 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
I am pondering adding an api note to the count methods to head off any
suprises as now the stream pipeline may not be executed.
I think it would be good to add a note to the spec, as this could be
surprising.
On Mar 11, 2015, at 7:23 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/11/2015 06:00 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
We need to include some unit tests before we can push.
I have a test which I've been using. It could be converted into
a unit test.
Ok. There are Unsafe tests in:
hotspot/test
On Mar 12, 2015, at 12:05 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
On 12 Mar 2015, at 09:44, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
On Mar 11, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Aggelos Biboudis bibou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Please review the patch for the count terminal operator
On Mar 10, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
On 3/10/2015 11:22 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Any sub-type of Process that does not override getPid will essentially
result in that USO being propagated to many ProcessHandle methods that
depend on the PID
Hi Brian,
This seems like a Cannot Reproduce (the description is fuzzy about what
versions of the JDK this previously worked on), and request further info.
You might want to check 8u20 and/or 8u31 (which is the version marked in the
bug), rather than 8u40, just to double check if something was
On Mar 23, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
I wonder if we, optionally, pass the exception type, either CME or IAE, could
we add CHM to the DataProvider?
Possibly, but I suspect any tests for CHM will be more fragile and involved. My
sense is it may be
On Mar 3, 2015, at 3:43 AM, Stuart Marks stuart.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Joe,
Oh yes, good point. Revised webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/8073923/webrev.1/
+1
Paul.
Hi Moh,
On Feb 27, 2015, at 7:23 PM, Rezaei, Mohammad A. mohammad.rez...@gs.com
wrote:
Why do you expect the new classes in the JDK not to be part of the API?
An MVJAR is one unit of release. Should it have two or more public APIs? if so
what is it's version and set of dependencies? Can it be
On Feb 28, 2015, at 4:40 AM, Xueming Shen xueming.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Updated to a static private class for the toMatchResult(). Added a private
field MatchResult for the anonymous MatchResult
wrapper.
Hi,
On Feb 13, 2015, at 8:26 PM, Stuart Marks stuart.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
OK, this looks great. Thanks for the updates.
There is also
in same order - in the same order
in the doc for the results() method, as Brian pointed out internally.
No need for another webrev.
Alas
On Feb 27, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
I really don't think this tooling support will provide sufficient
enticement to developers to maintain separate 7/8/9 source branches of
their libraries. Isn't that the main obstacle, and not the way the bits
are delivered?
On Feb 27, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/12/2015 09:52 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi
In connection with the JEP there is also a design document to help the
discussion:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/MultiVersionJar-8u60-9-design.md
We
On Feb 27, 2015, at 7:48 PM, Xueming Shen xueming.s...@oracle.com wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:34 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Feb 27, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Xueming Shenxueming.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
1133 * @param replacer
1134 * The function to be applied to the match
On Feb 27, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Xueming Shen xueming.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
1133 * @param replacer
1134 * The function to be applied to the match result of this
matcher
1135 * that returns a replacement string.
1136 *
1137 *p The
On Feb 26, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
If anyone wants to give this a test drive see stuff in here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/multiversion-jar/
produced by Steve (CC'ed) who has done all the development.
Another correction, CC'ing Steve
On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:33 PM, Alan Bateman alan.bate...@oracle.com wrote:
On 26/02/2015 22:09, Xueming Shen wrote:
thanks! webrev has been updated accordingly.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8073924/webrev
We could probably improve it further but what you have is good and not worth
On Feb 26, 2015, at 12:38 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
On 24 Feb 2015, at 15:07, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
On 24 Feb 2015, at 11:45, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
...
That's better now. Let me just try to measure the overhead of
On Feb 27, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
On Feb 26, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
If anyone wants to give this a test drive see stuff in here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/multiversion-jar/
produced by Steve
On Feb 23, 2015, at 5:57 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
I propose to remove two methods; they have been deprecated for more than a
decade,
do not seem to be in use anywhere, and have degenerate implementations.
java.lang.Runtime.getLocalizedInputStream(InputStream
On Mar 4, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/04/2015 03:07 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
If so then presumably that would be applicable to both get* and
set*?
I think so.
Could those boolean accepting methods be intrinsified or would they
always be Java only
On Mar 4, 2015, at 3:29 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/04/2015 02:15 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
The flag UseUnalignedAccesses feels a little awkward. IIUC it seems
to be acting as two things, a flag signalling an unaligned
architecture and a developer option to disable/enable
On Mar 2, 2015, at 8:30 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/25/2015 04:43 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/24/2015 11:18 PM, John Rose wrote:
My bottom line: I think we should use the internal HotSpot
API bytes.hpp by surfacing relevant parts of it up into Unsafe.
I have done this
On Feb 26, 2015, at 7:14 PM, Vladimir Ivanov vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com
wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8073644/webrev.00
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073644
After JDK-8069591 [1] which introduced LambdaForm customization, the assert
in
On Mar 3, 2015, at 3:09 AM, Stuart Marks stuart.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
On 3/2/15 1:49 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Feb 28, 2015, at 4:40 AM, Xueming Shen xueming.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Updated to a static private class for the toMatchResult(). Added a private
field MatchResult
On Feb 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
On 23/02/15 15:30, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:
Ok Chris, sounds good.
It could be, but I omitted it as it requires a pesky explicit
assignment of false in the case where there are not final fields!
You could
On Feb 12, 2015, at 5:07 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
On Feb 12, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
Would the following optimization make any sense?
public static T, U, A, R
CollectorT, ?, R flatMapping(Function? super T
On Feb 25, 2015, at 12:59 PM, Joel Borggrén-Franck joel.fra...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi Paul,
Yes that would indeed be possible, but after some internal discussions we
though it safer to reuse the Proxy invocation path.
Ok, i claim ignorance as to why that is so :-)
Is there any
On Feb 25, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/25/2015 11:26 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
I think it simpler just to have one method with a boolean parameter
whose default false value means native and true means
BigEndian. Otherwise, even simpler, just support native
On Feb 12, 2015, at 11:59 PM, Stephen Colebourne scolebou...@joda.org wrote:
Interesting direction.
Catching up on email after being away last week...
Reading carefully, the goal is actually very limited in scope, by
preventing any public API changes. It doesn't help adoption of JSR-310
Hi,
Looks ok to me.
Paul.
On Feb 24, 2015, at 12:26 PM, Joel Borggrén-Franck joel.fra...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi,
Here is a fix for an old issue with Class.getEnclosingMethod() and
Class.getEnclosingConstructor(). The problem is that we throw a spurious
AccessControlException in some
HI Peter,
On Feb 14, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
I read through the proposal and couldn't find an explanation of how resources
placed in versioned paths are going to be visible. For example, if the
multi-versioned jar contains the following
Hi Peter,
On Feb 14, 2015, at 8:54 PM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/12/2015 09:52 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi
In connection with the JEP there is also a design document to help the
discussion:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/MultiVersionJar-8u60-9
On Feb 25, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Stephen Colebourne scolebou...@joda.org wrote:
On 25 February 2015 at 13:30, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Even in the modular world i will expect class scanning will be used. While
we can now iterate reliably over classes in the image i don't believe
On Feb 25, 2015, at 5:27 PM, Brian Goetz brian.go...@oracle.com wrote:
On 2/12/2015 5:59 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Interesting direction.
Reading carefully, the goal is actually very limited in scope, by
preventing any public API changes. It doesn't help adoption of JSR-310
for
On Feb 23, 2015, at 10:08 PM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
- We have to be careful with loosening of volatile writes to final fields
in custom readObject() methods (BigDecimal.intCompact for example) especialy
if they are writes to fields that are not serial fields in
On Feb 24, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
If we expose the endianness query via a new method in unsafe we
should reuse that in java.nio.Bits and get rid of the associated
static code block.
Sure, I already did that.
Locally i guess? (just in case i missed
On Feb 24, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
I am all for keeping more code in Java if we can. I don't know enough about
assembler-based optimizations to determine if it might be possible to do
better on certain CPU architectures.
Me either, but I have tested this on
On Feb 26, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
If anyone wants to give this a test drive see stuff in here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/multiversion-jar/
produced by Steve (CC'ed) who has done all the development.
For example:
multiversion
/p:URLClassPath.jar -jar version.jar
I am running on version 9
Paul.
On Feb 12, 2015, at 9:52 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi
In connection with the JEP there is also a design document to help the
discussion:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/MultiVersionJar-8u60-9-design.md
On Feb 25, 2015, at 12:20 AM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com wrote:
On Feb 24, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
There will be only one runtime Unsafe sub-type ever observed in a
particular VM.
Oh, that's very nice.
That doesn't help with B accesses on L
On Feb 25, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/25/2015 09:27 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Feb 25, 2015, at 12:20 AM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Feb 24, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
wrote:
There will be only one
Hi Stuart,
Many thanks for looking at this gnarly code.
On Mar 24, 2015, at 2:41 AM, Stuart Marks stuart.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
After reading your notes here, and in the bug reports, and the comments in
the code, and banging my head against the code (before and after) for a
On Mar 24, 2015, at 12:27 AM, John Rose john.r.r...@oracle.com wrote:
Meanwhile, Paul Sandoz is working to refactor these aspects, creating a large
chunk of API that will be public, portable, and secure. You've got to
sympathize with him for not wanting to run through all the inevitable
On Apr 23, 2015, at 5:12 PM, Vladimir Ivanov vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com
wrote:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059455
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8059455/webrev.00/
LambdaForm.compileToBytecode() does unnecessary work (constructs invokerType
check an assertion)
On Apr 21, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
On 4/21/2015 8:29 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
There are statements in Process about the specified behavior of Processes
created by ProcessBuilder. That's why I included them in the @implSpec
clause. If @implSpec
Hi Roger,
I am not sure you have the @implSpec/@implNote quite correct on the new methods
of Process.
For example, for Process.toHandle i would expect something like:
...
@implSpec
This implementation throws an instance of UnsupportedOperationException and
performs no other action.
Hi Remi,
I was gonna propose the same trick you mentioned in your last email :-)
Similar tricks are possible for other cases like an equivalent of the recently
added ifPresentOrElse, but that was considered a little obtuse.
On Apr 17, 2015, at 11:37 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Hi.
Please review this patch from Doug that fixes an issue where a submitted task
to a f/j pool never gets executed.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8078490-fj-missed-submissions/webrev/
I already counted myself and Alexey as reviewers.
The issue manifests itself under certain
On Apr 23, 2015, at 3:23 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
Thanks for bringing this in Paul. The change looks ok to me, and suitable for
backport.
Trivially, the test does not need the Classpath exception in its license
header.
Doh, thanks, updated locally.
When i
On Apr 20, 2015, at 5:49 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
On 4/20/2015 9:01 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Roger,
I am not sure you have the @implSpec/@implNote quite correct on the new
methods of Process.
For example, for Process.toHandle i would expect something
doc of Process and or
ProcessBuilder about the behaviour of such Process instances? It would seem to
flow from the general statement you added to Process about overriding.
Paul.
Thanks, Roger
On 4/20/2015 12:33 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Apr 20, 2015, at 5:49 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri
HI Chan,
Attachments might be getting removed by the OpenJDK email server.
If you send me the webrev privately i can upload to cr. If so could you do that
please send the JMH tests as i think people might also be interested in those.
Paul.
On Apr 24, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Chan, Sunny
Hi Peter,
You are correct in stating that flatMap has some overhead.
There are optimizations in place for operating on one element and on the head
of the stream that reduce the overhead. Escape analysis sometimes works, it
would be nice if that were more reliable, and of course similar things
On Apr 28, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Peter,
You are correct in stating that flatMap has some overhead.
There are optimizations in place for operating on one element and on the head
of the stream that reduce the overhead.
I believe at least
Hi Remi,
Chasing this up. I have not joined the dark-side just yet... but can you log an
issue for this?
Thanks,
Paul.
On Apr 20, 2015, at 4:27 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
On 04/20/2015 01:39 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Remi,
I was gonna propose the same trick you mentioned
On Apr 28, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Stephen Colebourne scolebou...@joda.org wrote:
On 27 April 2015 at 16:23, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
One issue is there are zillions of possible more specific convenience
operations we could add. Everyone has their own favourite. Some static
Hi Stephen,
You can do this:
static T FunctionObject, StreamT casting(ClassT c) { // bike shed for
clearer name
return o - Stream.ofNullable(c.isInstance(o) ? c.cast(o) : null);
}
Object[] s = Stream.of(1, 2, 3, 4).toArray();
Stream.of(s).flatMap(casting(Integer.class)).
On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Colebourne scolebou...@joda.org wrote:
Obviously, this is yet another possible workaround. But it is a
workaround.
I don't consider it just a workaround :-)
There really aren't that many rough edges with the set of
methods added with lambdas, but this is
Hi
Please review:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8078645-ConcurrentMap-views-removeIf/webrev/
These updates are already in the 166 repo.
The documentation update to the class of ConcurrentMap is going through CCC. I
took the liberty of also cleaning up some smaller doc errors
On May 4, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Thanks, Paul.
Are there are too many cooks spoiling this broth?
Probably :-)
There are still a number of differences, mostly cosmetic, between your
version of ConcurrentMap.java and jsr166 CVS (let's try hard to
On Apr 27, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Kasper Nielsen kaspe...@gmail.com wrote:
The other default function I would like to see is stream.toList() (I can
live with collectToList) which is short for s.collect(Collectors.toList()).
50 % of my terminal functions are s.collect(Collectors.toList()).
Can you
On Apr 28, 2015, at 10:22 AM, Kasper Nielsen kaspe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Kasper Nielsen kaspe...@gmail.com wrote:
The other default function I would like to see is stream.toList() (I can
On May 5, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
I'd prefer to go the other way, deleting those trivial methods entirely,
utilizing the rarely used .new syntax.
Very good, even better!
Paul.
On May 2, 2015, at 11:31 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Hi all,
today, I stubble on a variant of JDK-8050818 [1],
trying to call negate() on a lambda which is not yet a Predicate (due to
target typing) which requires either to cast the lambda to a Predicate and
everybody knows
On May 6, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Attila Szegedi attila.szeg...@oracle.com wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 12:37 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
On May 2, 2015, at 11:31 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Hi all,
today, I stubble on a variant of JDK-8050818 [1],
trying to call
On May 6, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Ivan Gerasimov ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello everyone!
Here's the second iteration of the fix.
BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8079136
WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8079136/1/webrev/
This is cleaner.
For extra bonus
On May 7, 2015, at 1:23 AM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Hi Ivan,
I'm afraid of these changes - they are hard to review.
Can't we fix the SOE with a relatively small change to ArrayList.SubList
methods that recursively invoke parent methods to use iteration instead,
Since
Hi Ivan,
ArrayList
--
You can simplify SubList with:
private final class SubList extends AbstractListE implements RandomAccess {
private final SubList parent;
private final int offset;
int size;
// Top level sub-list
SubList(int offset, int fromIndex, int toIndex) {
On May 4, 2015, at 7:29 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
There are still a number of differences, mostly cosmetic, between your
version of ConcurrentMap.java and jsr166 CVS (let's try hard to keep that
the master copy).
Yeah, there are a bunch of cosmetic differences, i just
On May 4, 2015, at 11:11 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Paul, thanks.
Looks good.
Test uses some impressive machinery, but I like what we did in jsr166 tck
tests for similar sorts of tests:
- rename latch to done
- rename barrier to threadsStarted
- rename map to
On May 5, 2015, at 7:54 AM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
One query in ConcurrentSkipListMap, we have:
2500 // else use iterator
2501 @SuppressWarnings(unchecked) IteratorMap.EntryObject,E
it =
2502
On May 12, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Mandy Chung mandy.ch...@oracle.com wrote:
Ah, I understand Mandy now. You are talking about using special Properties
implementation just for system properties. Unfortunately, this is currently
valid code:
Properties props = new Properties();
...
Hi Vladimir,
I am not an export in the HS area but the code mostly made sense to me. I also
like Peter's suggestion of Context implementing Runnable.
Some minor comments.
CallSite.java:
145 private final long dependencies = 0; // Used by JVM to store
JVM_nmethodBucket*
It's a
On May 11, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
I mixed up my nextPutIndex and nextGetIndex. Sorry.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8079459/
This is also the cause of Bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8079860
Oops, i missed this in review. Looks good.
On May 13, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Vladimir Ivanov vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com
wrote:
Peter, Paul, thanks for the feedback!
Updated the webrev in place:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8079205/webrev.02
+1
I am not an export in the HS area but the code mostly made sense to me. I
On May 15, 2015, at 4:04 PM, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
And/Or should PriorityQueue override addAll and provide a more performant
implementation for common Collection types ( just like the constructor )?
It should be possible to improve this case too: create a new array,
On May 15, 2015, at 3:20 PM, Vitaly Davidovich vita...@gmail.com wrote:
Paul,
I don't think you're missing anything obvious (unless I am as well :)). What
you wrote is basically what I meant by creating static helper method in
Brett's own code that does exactly what you wrote. The
On May 15, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Alan Bateman alan.bate...@oracle.com wrote:
On 14/05/2015 14:40, Andrew Haley wrote:
:
Fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8079459-3-jdk/
Testcase:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8079459-3-hs/
This looks good to me.
Saem here,
Paul.
On May 14, 2015, at 8:17 AM, Brett Bernstein brett.bernst...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the linked sequence of messages refer to the addition of a
PriorityQueue constructor only taking a Comparator which was does appear in
Java 1.8. Did you have a link to something regarding the a
On May 15, 2015, at 11:48 AM, Chan, Sunny sunny.c...@gs.com wrote:
I have provided Paul with an updated patch:
Here it is:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/tmp/gs/sort/webrev.1/
In DualPivotQuicksort
63 /**
64 * The maximum length of run in merge sort.
65 */
66
Ho Roger,
I mostly focused on the specification.
Paul.
Process
--
35 * {@code Process} provides control of native processes started by
36 * ProcessBuilder.start and Runtime.exec.
Link to those methods?
92 /**
93 * Default constructor for Process.
94 */
95
On May 18, 2015, at 2:59 PM, A. Sundararajan
sundararajan.athijegannat...@oracle.com wrote:
Thanks for the review. Updated test as per your suggestion. Uploaded fresh
review @ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8072853/webrev.01/
+1
Paul.
On May 18, 2015, at 12:44 PM, A. Sundararajan
sundararajan.athijegannat...@oracle.com wrote:
Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8072853/webrev.00/ for
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072853
Changes to SimpleScriptContext look good.
Test-wise you could reduce the
On May 18, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the comments.
On 5/18/2015 7:58 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Ho Roger,
I mostly focused on the specification.
Paul.
Process
--
35 * {@code Process} provides control of native processes
On May 19, 2015, at 12:45 AM, Stuart Marks stuart.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
On 5/18/15 3:20 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
I would like to suggest some tweaks to the specification to get across this
method is transitioning control of traversal from enumeration to iterator.
How about:
Returns
On May 18, 2015, at 8:52 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Ivan Gerasimov ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com
wrote:
On 16.05.2015 2:18, Martin Buchholz wrote:
I wouldn't bother defining the constant.
I only need it in the regression test, to
On May 19, 2015, at 11:17 AM, Peter Levart peter.lev...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On 05/18/2015 12:20 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Stuart,
I would like to suggest some tweaks to the specification to get across this
method is transitioning control of traversal from enumeration to iterator
801 - 900 of 2479 matches
Mail list logo
