Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On 1/23/20 3:12 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: On 01/23/2020 13:56, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 1:16 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: On 01/23/2020 12:35, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 11:21 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: ...skipped... I don't care much about this change and can revert it. OK. What does

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Alex Menkov
On 01/23/2020 13:56, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 1:16 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: On 01/23/2020 12:35, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 11:21 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: ...skipped... I don't care much about this change and can revert it. OK. What does the "OK" mean? :) Do you prefer revert

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On 1/23/20 1:16 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: On 01/23/2020 12:35, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 11:21 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: ...skipped... Why is the following not placed at the end if the "if" block:   299   AddRef();   300   return S_OK; The following was removed. It's not clear to me wh

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Alex Menkov
On 01/23/2020 12:35, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/23/20 11:21 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: ...skipped... Why is the following not placed at the end if the "if" block:   299   AddRef();   300   return S_OK; The following was removed. It's not clear to me why it was and what the impact is:   2

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On 1/23/20 11:21 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: Hi Chris, On 01/22/2020 19:21, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/22/20 12:23 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: Hi Chris, On 01/17/2020 14:36, Chris Plummer wrote: Hi Alex, I assume that the following:    65   operator T* () const {    66 return m_ptr;    67   } Is

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-23 Thread Alex Menkov
Hi Chris, On 01/22/2020 19:21, Chris Plummer wrote: On 1/22/20 12:23 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: Hi Chris, On 01/17/2020 14:36, Chris Plummer wrote: Hi Alex, I assume that the following:    65   operator T* () const {    66 return m_ptr;    67   } Is used here:   183   AutoArrayPtr err

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-22 Thread Chris Plummer
On 1/22/20 12:23 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: Hi Chris, On 01/17/2020 14:36, Chris Plummer wrote: Hi Alex, I assume that the following:    65   operator T* () const {    66 return m_ptr;    67   } Is used here:   183   AutoArrayPtr errmsg(new char[strlen(str) + 32]); \   184   if (err

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-22 Thread Alex Menkov
Hi Chris, On 01/17/2020 14:36, Chris Plummer wrote: Hi Alex, I assume that the following:   65   operator T* () const {   66 return m_ptr;   67   } Is used here:  183   AutoArrayPtr errmsg(new char[strlen(str) + 32]); \  184   if (errmsg == nullptr) { \ I just don't underst

Re: PING: RFR: JDK-8235846: Improve WindbgDebuggerLocal implementation

2020-01-17 Thread Chris Plummer
Hi Alex, I assume that the following:   65   operator T* () const {   66 return m_ptr;   67   } Is used here:  183   AutoArrayPtr errmsg(new char[strlen(str) + 32]); \  184   if (errmsg == nullptr) { \ I just don't understand how this works. Somehow it seems the "T*" operator app