RFR: 8201608 fix broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html

Hi, Bug 8201608 highlights a few broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html As part of this fix, I took the liberty to move from package.html to package-info.java The webrev can be found at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8201608/webrev.00/

RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Please review a change to make the values of java.home, user.home, user.dir, and user.name effectively read-only for internal use.  The values are cached during initialization and the cached values are used. Webrev:   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-static-property-8066709/ Issue:  

RFR: JDK8U Backport of 8186171: HashMap: Entry.setValue may not work after Iterator.remove() called for previous entries

Hi all, Please review the fix for JDK8u Backport of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186171 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8186171/webrev.00/ Summary(also added to backport bug description): The back port for test files is not clean back port as all tests files

Re: Draft JEP proposal: JDK-8200758: Packaging Tool

Hi Kevin, Looks good, I assume as part of the work several existing javapackager bugs will be swept up along the way? We use javapackager and are very happy with what it gives us considering it is "free as in beer", but there are some significant workarounds required for code signing, especially

Re: [11] RFR: 8202026 8193552 8204269 : ISO 4217 Amendment #165 # 166 #167 Update

Hi Leo, Change looks good. One leftover from the previous: >> in CurrencyData.properties. This applies to tabela1.txt as well. Can you please clean those LV/LT entries in tablea1.txt as well? Naoto On 6/4/18 7:41 AM, li.ji...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Naoto, Pls review the updated code:

Re: RFR: 8201608 fix broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html

> On Jun 4, 2018, at 12:00 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: > > >> On Jun 4, 2018, at 2:51 PM, Paul Sandoz > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:22 AM, Lance Andersen >> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Bug 8201608 highlights

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Max, On 6/4/2018 11:41 AM, Wang Weijun wrote: Not a native English speaker, so my feeling might be incorrect. Will someone interpret this as that System.getProperty() will return a cached value? I don't think so, it should be clear that the values are cached at initialization or first

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Roger, In System.java — changing any standard system property may have unpredictable effects. Perhaps capitalize ‘changing' and maybe consider ‘results’ vs ‘effects’ HTH Best Lance > On Jun 4, 2018, at 3:55 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > > Hi Lance, > > On 6/4/2018 12:09

Re: RFR: 8201608 fix broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html

> On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:22 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: > > Hi, > > Bug 8201608 highlights a few broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html > and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html > > As part of this fix, I took the liberty to move from package.html to > package-info.java > > The webrev

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Lance, On 6/4/2018 12:09 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: Hi Roger, Overall, it looks very good. A couple of quick thoughts, nothing that needs any action unless you feel the desire :-) Line 671 in System.java, it mentions ‘standard’ system properties.  (as does the existing Implementation

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Alan, Updated webrev in place: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-static-property-8066709/ On 6/4/2018 12:21 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 04/06/2018 14:32, Roger Riggs wrote: Please review a change to make the values of java.home, user.home, user.dir, and user.name effectively

Re: RFR: 8201608 fix broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html

> On Jun 4, 2018, at 2:51 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: > > > >> On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:22 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Bug 8201608 highlights a few broken links in javax/sql/rowset/package.html >> and javax/sql/rowset/spi/package.html >> >> As part of this fix, I took the liberty

Re: Durations in existing JDK APIs

TimeUnit#toDuration is gone. Here's a non-strawman attempt at TimeUnit#convert(Duration). I was astonished how hard it was to get this really correct instead of merely mostly correct. For negative numbers, the long/int representation of Duration is sort-of a "floored" division instead of java's

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi, Roger A few things I noticed in src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java: * Properties can also be set via setProperties(Properties p), though that method is not mentioned in the doc changes (other than to setProperties() itself). 750 * setting a standard property after

Re: [11] RFR: 8202026 8193552 8204269 : ISO 4217 Amendment #165 # 166 #167 Update

Hi Naoto, Pls review the updated code: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ljiang/8202026/webrev.02/ - As suggested, clean up the old transition dates. - Update copyright year. - ISO 4217 Amendment #167 was published today, which discards the #166, so withdraw the change for #166 in webrev.02. Bug

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Roger Thanks for the explanation. Another question: Before this change, a SecurityException might be thrown when getProperty() is called, does you new code simulate this behavior? Or in these cases this is unnecessary? Also, looks like all change is inside java.base, do you have a

Re: RFR 8203768 : Avoid reallocation in java.base/unix/classes/java/lang/ProcessImpl.java

Hej Ivan, IIRC I wrote the first iteration of this code. I would expect that almost always either the buffer will be empty or the call to available() is accurate and the read will actually read everything in one chunk, so the byte array will be perfectly allocated with no need for re-allocation

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

On 6/4/18 6:32 AM, Roger Riggs wrote: Please review a change to make the values of java.home, user.home, user.dir, and user.name effectively read-only for internal use.  The values are cached during initialization and the cached values are used. Webrev:  

RFR JDK-8203872: Upgrading JDK with latest available LSR data from IANA

Hi, Please review the fix for JDK-8203872. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203872 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nishjain/8203872/webrev.01/ Fix: Updated the LSR data to the version 2017-08-15 Regards, Nishit Jain

RFR JDK-8200530: '\r' is not supported as "newline" in java.util.jar.Manifest.

Hi, Please help review the changeset for JDK-8200530. "newline" is specified as |CR LF | LF | CR|(/not followed by/|LF|) in Jar spec [1] from the very beginning but our implementation actually never supports "\r"/CR (not followed by LF) case. The proposed change here is to add CR as an

Re: Durations in existing JDK APIs

Looks like if you switch representation for negative Duration, much of the hair goes away. This version also optimizes for NANOSECONDS, which is very likely to be the target in practice: public long convert(Duration duration) { long secs = duration.getSeconds(); int nano =

RFR 8203768 : Avoid reallocation in java.base/unix/classes/java/lang/ProcessImpl.java

Hello! When closing a Process, its stdout and stderr are drained: The remaining bytes are copied into an array, and then the out/err stream is replaced with ByteArrayInputStream(). In a case when a fewer number of bytes were read then the Stream.available() suggested, the array is

Re: RFR 8203768 : Avoid reallocation in java.base/unix/classes/java/lang/ProcessImpl.java

Hej Martin! On 6/4/18 9:55 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: Hej Ivan, IIRC I wrote the first iteration of this code. I would expect that almost always either the buffer will be empty or the call to available() is accurate and the read will actually read everything in one chunk, so the byte array

Re: RFR: JDK8U Backport of 8186171: HashMap: Entry.setValue may not work after Iterator.remove() called for previous entries

Hej Deepak, This looks alright, but you really need to add that trailing newline on the test file (a Martin pet peeve). I wonder if instead we invest a little more work, but backport the entire tck directory. All tests should pass except for those that test features not yet backported. On Mon,

Re: RFR(s): 8204243: remove Thread.destroy() and Thread.stop(Throwable)

On 6/3/18 8:55 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 03/06/2018 13:11, David Holmes wrote: Any suggestions as to how to do that in a practical and effective way? "As if done by the highly-dangerous, long-deprecated and finally removed Thread.stop(Throwable)" ? ;-) In all seriousness I hate to do

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Roger, On 5/06/2018 5:55 AM, Roger Riggs wrote: Hi Lance, On 6/4/2018 12:09 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: Hi Roger, Overall, it looks very good. A couple of quick thoughts, nothing that needs any action unless you feel the desire :-) Line 671 in System.java, it mentions ‘standard’ system

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Looks good -Sundar On 04/06/18, 7:02 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: Please review a change to make the values of java.home, user.home, user.dir, and user.name effectively read-only for internal use. The values are cached during initialization and the cached values are used. Webrev:

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Hi Roger, Overall, it looks very good. A couple of quick thoughts, nothing that needs any action unless you feel the desire :-) Line 671 in System.java, it mentions ‘standard’ system properties. (as does the existing Implementation note) but it does not really specify what a standard system

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

On 04/06/2018 14:32, Roger Riggs wrote: Please review a change to make the values of java.home, user.home, user.dir, and user.name effectively read-only for internal use.  The values are cached during initialization and the cached values are used. Webrev:

Re: RFR: JDK-8203891: Upgrade JOpt Simple to 5.0.4

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/ Delta webrev only showing (all) JDK

Re: RFR: JDK-8203891: Upgrade JOpt Simple to 5.0.4

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/

Re: RFR JDK-8066709 Make some JDK system properties read only

Not a native English speaker, so my feeling might be incorrect. Will someone interpret this as that System.getProperty() will return a cached value? I would say “Although getProperty() always returns the last value set by setProperty() (I assume this is the current behavior), it is not

RFR: 8196988 (Resolve disabled warnings for implicit-fallthrough gcc option)

Hi, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdama/8196988/webrev.00/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196988 Note: gcc 7.3 compiler emits warnings for implicit fall-through switch cases,but these warnings are disabled earlier.I have enabled these warnings and fixed in sources.

Re: RFR: JDK-8203891: Upgrade JOpt Simple to 5.0.4

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/complete/ Delta webrev only showing