On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 06:08:41 GMT, Yumin Qi <mi...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Hi, Please review > systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split it > into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code into > CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info (DumpTime/RunTime) to > sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy related to > lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and > light. > > Tests: tier1,tier3,tier4 > > Thanks > Yumin > _Mailing list message from [David Holmes](mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com) on > [build-dev](mailto:build-...@mail.openjdk.java.net):_ > > Hi Yumin, > > On 23/06/2021 4:19 pm, Yumin Qi wrote: > > > Hi, Please review > > systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split it > > into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code into > > CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info (DumpTime/RunTime) to > > sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy related to > > lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat > > and light. > > I'm not really seeing a consistent or recognisable naming pattern here. > We seem to have a mix of: > > - cds/foo.cpp > - cds/fooShared.cpp > - cds/sharedFoo.cpp > > Can we establish a simple naming scheme here? > > Thanks, > David Thanks David. I was thinking of that too. The best practice is for a class Foo we have foo.hpp for definition and foo.cpp for implementation. Here indeed exists non-consistency that I put DumpTime/RunTtime in a single file. Let me double check and update. Yumin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4568
