On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 06:39:29 GMT, David Simms <[email protected]> wrote:

>> This is a "*sub-review pull request*" for the first 
>> [preview](https://openjdk.org/jeps/12) of [JEP 401: Value Classes and 
>> Objects](https://openjdk.org/jeps/401), specifically 
>> [JDK-8317278](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317278): JVM 
>> implementation of value classes and objects.
>> 
>>> [!NOTE]
>>> This pull request and the other sub-review pull requests listed below are 
>>> based on the "*master pull request*" 
>>> (https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31120). It contains the same full set 
>>> of code changes as the "*master pull request*" to preserve the full 
>>> implementation context; the language compiler, JVM, and standard library 
>>> changes are intertwined. This separate pull requests exist only to 
>>> subdivide the review and related discussion by area.
>> 
>> Other areas for review:
>> 
>> - [JDK-8317277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317277): Java language 
>> implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31121
>> - [JDK-8317279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317279): Standard 
>> library implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31123
>> 
>> Code changes resulting from the review process should be made in 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/).
>> 
>> `valhalla/lworld` is currently updated from `jdk/master` whenever a weekly 
>> [`jdk` tag](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/tags) is created. At that time, 
>> code changes from `valhalla/lworld` will be propagated to the master pull 
>> request and to all sub-review pull requests, including this one.
>> 
>> Ultimately, review sign-off will be recorded on the "*master pull request*", 
>> and this pull request will be closed without integration.
>> 
>> This pull request has a large code surface area and often conflicts with 
>> `jdk/master` on a daily basis. Refer to 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/) for the latest 
>> state of the project code, keeping in mind that it may lag several days 
>> behind `jdk/master`. Both repositories may be needed as references during 
>> review.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> David Simms has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 2859 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch '8317277' into jep401_sub_review_8317278
>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'valhalla/lworld' into 8317277
>  - Merge
>    
>    Merge jdk-28+4
>  - 8386963: [lworld] Improve the exception message from Object 
> synchronization methods on value objects
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dholmes, alanb
>  - 8387300: [lworld] Minor review comments in javac
>    
>    Reviewed-by: vromero
>  - 8387192: [lworld] Review comment drop for core libs
>    
>    Reviewed-by: jvernee, vromero
>  - 8386999: [lworld] C2: assert(is_dead_loop_safe()) failed: shouldn't be 
> cleared yet
>    
>    Reviewed-by: qamai, vlivanov
>  - 8386787: [lworld] 
> compiler/valhalla/inlinetypes/TestValueConstruction.java#StressIncrementalInliningDontInlineMyAbstractInit
>  timed out
>    
>    Reviewed-by: phubner, chagedorn
>  - 8386995: [lworld] Duplicate value classes are a preview feature warning
>    
>    Reviewed-by: alanb, vromero
>  - 8383389: [lworld] Augment AOTMapLogger::print_oop_details to support flat 
> arrays with oops
>    
>    Reviewed-by: iklam, fparain
>  - ... and 2849 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/193de1b1...cffcfb57

src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/vm/annotation/NullRestricted.java line 
48:

> 46: @Target(ElementType.FIELD)
> 47: @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
> 48: public @interface NullRestricted {

As far as I can see, neither JEP 401 nor the "Strict Field Initialization in 
the JVM" JEP proposes or specifies null-restricted semantics for fields. I 
looked around for the usages of this annotation and can't find it being used 
anywhere in the production source. The only references to it (as far as I can 
see) are in test cases and class file parsing.

Is this annotation, the class file parsing of this annotation and the tests 
related to null-restricted semantics unavoidable for the implementation of JEP 
401 and "Strict Field Initialization in the JVM" implementation? Or would it be 
possible to leave these out?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31122#discussion_r3481861259

Reply via email to