+1
Mandy
On 3/31/20 11:57 AM, Langer, Christoph wrote:
Hi Mandy,
this is a good suggestion. The listing of system properties at the
props field declaration seems somewhat redundant, given that it
already exists more exactly and with API normativity in the doc of
System::getProperties().
So what do you think of this version:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8241947.1/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8241947.1/> ?
Thanks
Christoph
*From:* Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com>
*Sent:* Dienstag, 31. März 2020 19:34
*To:* Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com>;
core-libs-...@openjdk.java.net
*Cc:* build-dev <build-dev@openjdk.java.net>
*Subject:* Re: RFR (S): 8241947: Minor comment fixes for system
property handling
On 3/31/20 7:56 AM, Langer, Christoph wrote:
Hi,
please review a small fix that updates two comments.
The first one, in make/autoconf/spec.gmk.in, is probably quite old. It talks about handling of a property
"vm.vendor" in VersionProps.java.template. However, there is no property "vm.vendor", it
must rather be "java.vendor". I stumbled over that when looking at the change of JDK-4947890
(Minimize JNI upcalls in system-properties initialization).
The second one is the code comment attached to "private static Properties props;" in
java.lang.System. After JDK-8197927 (Allow the system property `java.vendor.version` to be
undefined), "java.vendor.version" can be undefined, so this should be reflected in the
comment. I also took the liberty to remove an unneeded import statement.
Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8241947
Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8241947.0/
I wonder if we still want to keep this block of comments listing a
subset of system properties. Anyway the minor comment looks okay.
Mandy
