Thank you for all the feedback. I have updated my changes to use
"CHECK_EXCEPTION_RETURN" and "CHECK_EXCEPTION" macro recently added into
jni_util.h. I also removed else block in function setStaticIntField() in
Version.c since (*env)->GetStaticFieldID will throw a same exception if
the field cannot be found.
Here is the new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/8029007/webrev.01/. Thanks!
-Dan
On 01/10/2014 10:21 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
On Jan 10 2014, at 10:09 , Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 10 Jan 2014, at 18:05, Dan Xu <dan...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Roger,
My macro is a little different from yours, which compares with -1 instead of
NULL. I also see CHECK_EXCEPTION macro. Thanks for adding them, which are
useful when I cannot decide the pending exception state by just using return
values.
As for the style, actually I prefer the (!pointer) to (pointer == NULL) because
it is more concise and also make me avoid the typo like (pointer = NULL), which
I cannot find from the compilation. Thanks!
There's always "yoda conditions" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoda_conditions,
(NULL == pointer), but that's not likely to make anyone (besides me) happy.
Mike
Not that it matters, but my preference is to == NULL.
-Chris.
-Dan
On 01/10/2014 08:40 AM, roger riggs wrote:
Hi Dan,
Just pushed are macros in jni_util.h to do the same function as your new macros.
Please update to use the common macros instead of introducing new ones.
Style wise, I would avoid mixing binary operators (!) with pointers.
it is clearer to compare with NULL. (The CHECK_NULL macro will do the check
and return).
(Not a Reviewer)
Thanks, Roger
On 1/10/2014 1:31 AM, Dan Xu wrote:
Hi All,
Please review the fix for JNI pending exception issues reported in jdk-8029007.
Thanks!
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/8029007/webrev.00/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029007
-Dan
