Hi Sergey,

 

Per our conversation, I have done the following changes:

1.       Found that the .class size increases by 1kb when streams are used, so 
reverted the changes related to it.

2.       Moved the "++nextIndex" into the conditional, so that there is no 
logical change.

Here is the updated webrev: 
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kaddepalli/8190281/webrev01/

 

Thanks,

Krishna

 

From: Krishna Addepalli 
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 2:43 PM
To: swing-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: [10][JDK-8190281] Code cleanup in 
src\java.desktop\share\classes\javax\swing\tree\VariableHeightLayoutCache.java

 

Hi All,

 

Please review the fix for bug:

Bug: JDK-8190281 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190281

JDK 10 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kaddepalli/8190281/webrev00/

 

This bug was created while root causing JDK-8187936, and the following 
refactoring points have been addressed:

 

1. Line 927: Uninitialized variables, checking for trivial reject case multiple 
times. 
2. Line 999: Traditional code written to find maximum size of components, which 
can be done without any local variables and explicit looping by replacing with 
streams. 
3. Line 1365: Code repetition for differenct conditions, which can be ored 
together to reduce the repetition. 
4. Line 1482: A large code block gets repeated only because of different values 
need to be passed in one line. This can be moved to a variable initialization, 
and the repeating code blocks can be reduced to one. 
5. Line 1505: Variable initialization can be simplified by combining different 
conditions. 
6. Line 1540: An explicit loop to apply a function over a collection, can be 
achieved in one line by a forEach construct.  - This is producing some visual 
artifacts, so ignored.
7. Line 1747: Combine all the trivial reject cases into one condition, and 
also, a potential bug which increments the "nextIndex" value beyond the length 
of the containing elements. The increment should happen only if the trivial 
reject case fails.

 

Thanks,

Krishna

Reply via email to