Thank you Alan!
Ivan
On 26.08.2013 14:33, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 25/08/2013 20:28, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
I couldn't come up with any idea on how to test the overflow without
actually allocating that much memory.:
I simplified the test a bit once again. Instead of invoking the same
class twice, I created a designated class for the child.
Here's the new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/7129312/4/webrev/
Hope it looks fine.
And here's the exported change set:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/2commit/7129312-jdk8-Negative-array-size.patch
I think I'd preferred using the parameter to indicate that the child
should be launcher but what you have is okay. I'll push this for you
shortly.
-Alan
