+1 Karen
> On Nov 10, 2016, at 5:56 PM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > On 11/11/2016 8:46 AM, Mandy Chung wrote: >> >>> On Nov 10, 2016, at 2:28 PM, Peter Levart <peter.lev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/10/2016 05:59 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/11/2016 17:42, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>> My original suggestion for the method was to make it static, and possibly >>>>> even caller-sensitive, for just this reason. >>>> Changing it to be non-final looks reasonable here, the main reason being >>>> that it's a no-arg isXXXX method and so unlikely that there are custom >>>> class loaders that have a method with this name that returns something >>>> other than boolean. However the modifier might be a concern and so time >>>> will tell if there are custom class loaders that defining a non-public >>>> no-arg method with this name. >>>> >>>> -Alan >>> >>> It would be nice for this method to be final. >> >> That’d be the ideal case. >> >>> This way it could be relied on to return the "correct" answer regardless of >>> the implementation subclass. Who knows, maybe some internal logic might >>> need this method in the future and at that time another package-protected >>> method would have to be added and exposed via SharedSecrets or similar. If >>> "isParallelCapable" is already taken, then what about choosing another name? >> >> This is alternative but it’s hard to predict the probability of a name clash >> with existing subclass implementation. >> >>> Since there is already a @CallerSensitive protected static method called >>> "registerAsParallelCapable" for subclasses to call from their <clinit> >>> blocks, the query could be called: >>> >>> isRegisteredAsParallelCapable() ? >>> >>> I doubt this name is already taken by any subclass out there… >> >> isRegisteredAsParallelCapable may be okay. > > I'd vote for that and keeping it final. > > Thanks, > David > >> Mandy >>
