Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks John! On 21/06/2018 6:15 AM, John Rose wrote: Good; I like the care to distinguish "nested" classes (using the word "enclosing") from the newer concept of "nests" and "nestmates", as well as the careful framing of how stuff bubbles up from the classfile. (Kudos to Alex!) Yes this is

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks Paul! David On 21/06/2018 3:43 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jun 19, 2018, at 10:25 PM, mandy chung wrote: The javadoc update looks good to me. Same here, +1 Paul.

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Karen, On 21/06/2018 7:42 AM, Karen Kinnear wrote: Looks good. Thanks. Unfortunately there were a few more minor edits "overnight". Everything updated in place (apologies as I wanted to include a simple patch but overwrote things before realising I now had no means to do so.) Summary:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Looks good. Can you send the updates to the valhalla spec experts please? We told them this was coming, and minor changes for clarification. thanks, Karen > On Jun 19, 2018, at 12:41 AM, David Holmes wrote: > > Discussions on the CSR request have led to further changes to the >

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Good; I like the care to distinguish "nested" classes (using the word "enclosing") from the newer concept of "nests" and "nestmates", as well as the careful framing of how stuff bubbles up from the classfile. (Kudos to Alex!) — John On Jun 19, 2018, at 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Some

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

> On Jun 19, 2018, at 10:25 PM, mandy chung wrote: > > The javadoc update looks good to me. > Same here, +1 Paul.

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks Mandy! David On 20/06/2018 3:25 PM, mandy chung wrote: The javadoc update looks good to me. Mandy On 6/19/18 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote: Some further adjustments to getNestMembers() was made. Everything updated in place. Thanks, David On 20/06/2018 9:30 AM, David Holmes wrote:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

The javadoc update looks good to me. Mandy On 6/19/18 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote: Some further adjustments to getNestMembers() was made. Everything updated in place. Thanks, David On 20/06/2018 9:30 AM, David Holmes wrote: Sorry another update is imminent ... stay tuned. David On

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Some further adjustments to getNestMembers() was made. Everything updated in place. Thanks, David On 20/06/2018 9:30 AM, David Holmes wrote: Sorry another update is imminent ... stay tuned. David On 19/06/2018 2:41 PM, David Holmes wrote: Discussions on the CSR request have led to further

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Sorry another update is imminent ... stay tuned. David On 19/06/2018 2:41 PM, David Holmes wrote: Discussions on the CSR request have led to further changes to the documentation involving nests and the new nest-related method. There are no semantic changes here just clearer explanations.

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Discussions on the CSR request have led to further changes to the documentation involving nests and the new nest-related method. There are no semantic changes here just clearer explanations. Incremental webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v7-incr/

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 13/06/2018 4:08 PM, joe darcy wrote: Hi David, On 5/24/2018 10:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the further minor updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental corelibs webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v3-incr/ Full

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks for the explanation, Joe. I see the subtle difference on these terminologies. I'm okay with this patch. I like the other option better to remove @apiNote since the spec states that the duplicates may not be removed. Mandy On 6/12/18 5:49 PM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: On 6/11/2018

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi David, On 5/24/2018 10:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the further minor updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental corelibs webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v3-incr/ Full corelibs webrev:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 6/11/2018 10:38 PM, mandy chung wrote: On 6/11/18 10:16 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here is one further minor update from the CSR discussions: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v5-incr/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java.cdiff.html "This

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 6/11/18 10:16 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here is one further minor update from the CSR discussions: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v5-incr/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java.cdiff.html "This implementation" is fine, as used in many

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Here is one further minor update from the CSR discussions: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v5-incr/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java.cdiff.html Thanks, David On 25/05/2018 3:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the further minor updates so far

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks Mandy! David On 26/05/2018 7:13 AM, mandy chung wrote: Looks good. Mandy On 5/24/18 10:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the further minor updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental corelibs webrev:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Looks good. Mandy On 5/24/18 10:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the further minor updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental corelibs webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v3-incr/ Full corelibs webrev:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Here are the further minor updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental corelibs webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v3-incr/ Full corelibs webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v3/ Change

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/22/18 6:08 PM, David Holmes wrote: Will make the suggested changes for v3 (once I've processed hotspot v2 stuff). Unless you need to send a new webrev for other's comments, the test update I suggest don't need a new webrev.  You can fix it in your local repo before you push. Mandy

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Mandy, On 23/05/2018 10:56 AM, mandy chung wrote: On 5/22/18 3:15 AM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v2-incr/ Full webrev:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Paul, On 23/05/2018 2:05 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: Hi David, Thank you for your patience, i struggled to explain my point. How about we proceed as is, and as you suggest, i can discuss more with John when he is back from vacation. I think we will have time to revisit if necessary. That

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Peter, Thanks for looking at this. I'm glad I didn't try to respond last night before your follow up emails came through :) On 22/05/2018 8:36 PM, Peter Levart wrote: Hi David, On 05/15/2018 02:52 AM, David Holmes wrote: Master webrev of all changes:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/22/18 3:15 AM, David Holmes wrote: Here are the updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v2-incr/ Full webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v2/

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/22/18 3:36 AM, Peter Levart wrote: In jl.Class: 3911 // returning a different class requires a security check 3912 SecurityManager sm = System.getSecurityManager(); 3913 if (sm != null) { 3914 checkPackageAccess(sm, 3915

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi David, Thank you for your patience, i struggled to explain my point. How about we proceed as is, and as you suggest, i can discuss more with John when he is back from vacation. I think we will have time to revisit if necessary. My preference would be to store the classes from the class

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 05/22/2018 12:36 PM, Peter Levart wrote: So how about putting the nestmate access logic just before the last if (!successSoFar) { return false; }:     // Check for nestmate access if member is private     if (!successSoFar && Modifier.isPrivate(modifiers)) {   // assert:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 05/22/2018 12:36 PM, Peter Levart wrote: This would not penalize access to package-private and protected members with areNestMates() JNI calls and maybe caching will not be needed at all. But if caching may need to be performed, then the simplest form of nestmate access check caching

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi David, On 05/15/2018 02:52 AM, David Holmes wrote: Master webrev of all changes: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.full.v1/ I skimmed over reflection API changes. In jl.Class: 3911 // returning a different class requires a security check 3912

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Here are the updates so far in response to all the review comments. Incremental webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v2-incr/ Full webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v2/ Change summary:

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Peter, On 22/05/2018 6:36 PM, Peter Levart wrote: On 05/22/18 02:05, David Holmes wrote: Although those well-formed programs may need to check for dups themselves because they don’t want to rely in implementation details (and they are not aware of the probability of implementations

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 05/22/18 02:05, David Holmes wrote: Although those well-formed programs may need to check for dups themselves because they don’t want to rely in implementation details (and they are not aware of the probability of implementations deviating). I'm quite concerned about your level of

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Alan, On 22/05/2018 4:19 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 22/05/2018 01:05, David Holmes wrote: : Here’s a thought: did you consider caching the nest members in the ReflectionData class? that may be worth doing regardless of dups. No that was not considered. Caching, as you know, is a

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

.@univ-mlv.fr>, "Alan Bateman" <alan.bate...@oracle.com> Cc: "core-libs-dev" <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> Envoyé: Jeudi 17 Mai 2018 10:37:46 Objet: Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control Hi Remi, Hi David On 17/

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 22/05/2018 01:05, David Holmes wrote: : Here’s a thought: did you consider caching the nest members in the ReflectionData class? that may be worth doing regardless of dups. No that was not considered. Caching, as you know, is a space-time trade off and we have no data to use to determine

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Paul, On 22/05/2018 2:15 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: Hi David, On May 21, 2018, at 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Paul, On 22/05/2018 2:39 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes wrote: 3984 public Class[]

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Mandy, On 22/05/2018 2:14 PM, mandy chung wrote: On 5/21/18 8:41 PM, David Holmes wrote: Class.java 3988 Class[] members = getNestMembers0(); If the above fails with any LinkageError, what is the expected behavior if Class::getNestMembers() is called the second time? will it throw the

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi David, > On May 21, 2018, at 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > On 22/05/2018 2:39 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: >>> On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes wrote: >>> 3984 public Class[] getNestMembers() { I still

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/21/18 8:41 PM, David Holmes wrote: Class.java 3988 Class[] members = getNestMembers0(); If the above fails with any LinkageError, what is the expected behavior if Class::getNestMembers() is called the second time? will it throw the same LinkageError? Based on the implementation it

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Mandy, On 22/05/2018 1:23 PM, mandy chung wrote: Hi David, I reviewed: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v1/ Looks good in general.  I have a couple other comments.  I will review the new version that includes new tests in test/jdk/java/lang/reflect when

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi David, I reviewed: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v1/ Looks good in general.  I have a couple other comments.  I will review the new version that includes new tests in test/jdk/java/lang/reflect when it's ready. Class.java 3988 Class[] members =

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Thanks Mandy. I'll make the addition regarding the package - as endorsed by John (thanks John!) David On 22/05/2018 11:32 AM, mandy chung wrote: On 5/21/18 5:48 PM, David Holmes wrote: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-dev/2018-March/003971.html and as I responded to Alan,

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/21/18 5:48 PM, David Holmes wrote: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-dev/2018-March/003971.html and as I responded to Alan, for getNestMembers() it doesn't say "the returned class" it says "any returned class" and "that returned class". There is no singular/plural

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On May 21, 2018, at 5:48 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > * A nest is a set of classes and interfaces (nestmates) that > * form an access control context in which each nestmate has access to the > * private members of the other nestmates. > * The nest host is the class or

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Mandy, Thanks for taking another look at this! On 22/05/2018 7:47 AM, mandy chung wrote: On 5/20/18 10:57 PM, David Holmes wrote: - I suspect the @throws SecurityException in getNestMembers was copied from getNestHost as it uses "returned class" (singular). It refers to "If any

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 5:55 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - Can the spec for Class::getNestHost be explicit that it returns "this" when the class is a primitive or array class? This is covered by: "A class or interface that is not explicitly a member of a nest,

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Paul, On 22/05/2018 2:39 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes wrote: 3984 public Class[] getNestMembers() { I still think not removing dups is a mistake as it could be a source of subtle bugs. But i doubt at this point i can

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/20/18 10:57 PM, David Holmes wrote: - I suspect the @throws SecurityException in getNestMembers was copied from getNestHost as it uses "returned class" (singular). It refers to "If any returned class ..." and "that returned class". I don't see any problematic singular uses - can you

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 5/21/18 9:39 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes wrote: 3984 public Class[] getNestMembers() { I still think not removing dups is a mistake as it could be a source of subtle bugs. But i doubt at this point i can persuade you or

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

> On May 20, 2018, at 11:32 PM, David Holmes wrote: > >> 3984 public Class[] getNestMembers() { >> I still think not removing dups is a mistake as it could be a source of >> subtle bugs. But i doubt at this point i can persuade you or others to >> change it :-)

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - Can the spec for Class::getNestHost be explicit that it returns "this" when the class is a primitive or array class? This is covered by: "A class or interface that is not explicitly a member of a nest, is a member of the nest consisting only of

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 5:20 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - I suspect the @throws SecurityException in getNestMembers was copied from getNestHost as it uses "returned class" (singular). It refers to "If any returned class ..." and "that returned class". I don't

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 5:09 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - Can Class::getNestMembers specify if it runs the class initializer of any classes that it loads? Less of an issue for getNestHost as the host is likely loaded already. None of these methods specifically

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - I suspect the @throws SecurityException in getNestMembers was copied from getNestHost as it uses "returned class" (singular). It refers to "If any returned class ..." and "that returned class". I don't see any problematic singular uses - can you

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 21/05/2018 06:57, David Holmes wrote: : - Can Class::getNestMembers specify if it runs the class initializer of any classes that it loads? Less of an issue for getNestHost as the host is likely loaded already. None of these methods specifically or intentionally initialize any classes. A

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On this topic ... On 21/05/2018 4:48 PM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Peter, On 21/05/2018 4:12 PM, Peter Levart wrote: On 05/21/2018 07:57 AM, David Holmes wrote: Do we really need to spell out the case for primitives and arrays? If May I add that getEnclosingClass() doesn't explain that

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Peter, On 21/05/2018 4:12 PM, Peter Levart wrote: On 05/21/2018 07:57 AM, David Holmes wrote: Do we really need to spell out the case for primitives and arrays? If so would it suffice to add the following: "A class or interface that is not explicitly a member of a nest *(such as

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Paul, Thanks for looking at this. On 17/05/2018 4:00 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: HI, Nice thorough work on this, surprisingly tricky in some areas esp. MHs. Yeah the fundamental access control part was simple. The invokeinterface semantics for private method invocations via MH got a bit

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 05/21/2018 07:57 AM, David Holmes wrote: Do we really need to spell out the case for primitives and arrays? If so would it suffice to add the following: "A class or interface that is not explicitly a member of a nest *(such as primitive or array classes)*, is a member of the nest

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi Alan, Many thanks for looking at this! Let me start by saying that generally any spec changes (even non-normative) have to pass a high bar given the number of levels of review the spec, ie API, has already had. That isn't to say that no changes will be considered but I'm very wary of

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

> Hi all, >>> >>> - Mail original - >>>> De: "Alan Bateman" <alan.bate...@oracle.com> >>>> À: "David Holmes" <david.hol...@oracle.com>, "core-libs-dev" >>>> <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

dev" <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> Envoyé: Mardi 15 Mai 2018 15:53:44 Objet: Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control On 15/05/2018 01:52, David Holmes wrote: This review is being spread across four groups: langtools, core-libs, hotspot

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Alan Bateman" <alan.bate...@oracle.com> >>> À: "David Holmes" <david.hol...@oracle.com>, "core-libs-dev" >>> <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> >>> Envoyé: Mardi 15 Mai 2018 15:53:44 >>> Objet: Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 80103

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Paul, Alan, Just a quick thank you for taking a look at this so soon. I will respond to both of you as soon as practical. Thanks, David On 17/05/2018 4:00 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: HI, Nice thorough work on this, surprisingly tricky in some areas esp. MHs. Class — 3857 * If there is

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Mai 2018 15:53:44 Objet: Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control On 15/05/2018 01:52, David Holmes wrote: This review is being spread across four groups: langtools, core-libs, hotspot and serviceability. This is the specific review thread for core-lib

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

Hi all, - Mail original - > De: "Alan Bateman" <alan.bate...@oracle.com> > À: "David Holmes" <david.hol...@oracle.com>, "core-libs-dev" > <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> > Envoyé: Mardi 15 Mai 2018 15:53:44 > Objet: Re: [

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

HI, Nice thorough work on this, surprisingly tricky in some areas esp. MHs. Class — 3857 * If there is any error accessing the nest host, or the nest host is 3858 * in any way invalid, then {@code this} is returned. I am curious under what conditions this can arise. As a caller this

Re: [core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

On 15/05/2018 01:52, David Holmes wrote: This review is being spread across four groups: langtools, core-libs, hotspot and serviceability. This is the specific review thread for core-libs - webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v1/ The API additions

[core-libs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

This review is being spread across four groups: langtools, core-libs, hotspot and serviceability. This is the specific review thread for core-libs - webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8010319-JEP181/webrev.corelibs.v1/ See below for full details - including annotated full webrev