Re: RFR(XS): 8198585: add asserts to verify that ServiceUtil::visible_oop is not needed

Ok. I'll make that change. thanks, Chris On 2/23/18 6:45 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Instead of "assert(false, ...", I recommend "fatal(...". This will cause a failure in all build configs including 'release' bits. Dan On 2/22/18 8:16 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: Hello, Please review the

Re: RFR(XS): 8198585: add asserts to verify that ServiceUtil::visible_oop is not needed

Instead of "assert(false, ...", I recommend "fatal(...". This will cause a failure in all build configs including 'release' bits. Dan On 2/22/18 8:16 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: Hello, Please review the following: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198585

Re: RFR(XS): 8198585: add asserts to verify that ServiceUtil::visible_oop is not needed

Hi Chris, +1 Thanks, Serguei On 2/23/18 01:58, Stefan Karlsson wrote: Looks good. StefanK On 2018-02-23 02:16, Chris Plummer wrote: Hello, Please review the following: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198585 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8198585/webrev.00/webrev/

Re: RFR(XS): 8198585: add asserts to verify that ServiceUtil::visible_oop is not needed

Looks good. StefanK On 2018-02-23 02:16, Chris Plummer wrote: Hello, Please review the following: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198585 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8198585/webrev.00/webrev/ Before removing ServiceUtil::visible_oop(), I want to make sure it really isn't