Re: RFR (JAXP) 8158619: Very large CDATA section in XML document causes OOME

Thu, 17 Nov 2016 15:14:33 -0800 


On 11/17/16, 1:50 PM, Langer, Christoph wrote:


Hi Joe,


thanks for the clarification about formatting. It was particularly 
good for me to learn about the line in between license header and 
package name as I was not sure whether it should exist or not. I'll 
update my outstanding webrevs with that regards. And I'll keep going 
to do formatting and warnings cleanups as I go...





Thanks!  That helps a lot. We had over 5000 warnings, hopefully we'd get 
rid of them all over a period of time.


Best,
Joe


Best regards

Christoph

*From:*Joe Wang [mailto:huizhe.w...@oracle.com]
*Sent:* Donnerstag, 17. November 2016 20:58
*To:* Lance Andersen <lance.ander...@oracle.com>

*Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; daniel Fuchs 
<daniel.fu...@oracle.com>; Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com>
*Subject:* Re: RFR (JAXP) 8158619: Very large CDATA section in XML 
document causes OOME


Thanks Lance, Daniel, and Christoph.  I adopted the changes as suggested.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/ 
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejoehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/>



The changeset has been in my workspace for over a month now. So it's 
good to get it out of the way.


On raw type, other warnings and obsolete code:

      we made the top 3 in terms of the number of warnings. We're 
trying to correct that as we go with fixing a small set at a time 
within the scope of the current change. It's not being ideal since 
often times we have to stop where it affects the signatures (or have 
to expand to other classes). Eventually, we'd have to bite the bullet 
and conduct a complete overhaul of the code.  I actually did it in the 
jaxp standalone repo with regard to the obsolete types, but it was 
lost in the middle of transition during the jdk7.



On format, I agree with Daniel, we can at least fix the very-long 
lines near the changes, and not to introduce new ones. For other 
formats, it's tempting to just hit the NetBeans - format function. But 
then, it'd generate a huge amount of changes that could make it 
difficult for the reviewers.  One thing we could do is not to include 
format changes in webrevs, and instead just make a note that 
NetBeans-format will be done before check-in. But even that might be 
unnecessary since it would make it hard to trace back changes in the repo.



After all is said (about format), we are unfortunately to live with 
the messy format we inherited, but we shall fix the long lines though.



**it's interesting to note that NetBeans-format will remove the line 
between License header and package name, which is required by the 
Licencing tool**


Thanks,
Joe

On 11/17/16, 5:43 AM, Lance Andersen wrote:

    Hi Joe,

    Overall looks good.

    I agree with Daniel that you might want to reconsider
    reworking JdkXmlUtils.getValue to make it a bit more robust incase
    of an surprise Object passed for value.

    HTH

    Best

    Lance

        On Nov 16, 2016, at 5:12 PM, Joe Wang <huizhe.w...@oracle.com
        <mailto:huizhe.w...@oracle.com>> wrote:

        Hi,

        Please review an enhancement adding a property to allow for
        specifying the chunk size of CDATA.

        JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158619
        webrevs:
        http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/
        <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejoehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/>

        Thanks,
        Joe

    <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>


    <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>Lance
    Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
    Oracle Java Engineering
    1 Network Drive
    Burlington, MA 01803
    lance.ander...@oracle.com <mailto:lance.ander...@oracle.com>

























					Reply via email to