Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 12:20:38 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> This cast is only to tell the compiler which overloaded method to call, and
>> I don't think there will be a real cast at runtime. It might look a little
>> ugly but extracting it into a variable declaration/definition plus a new
>> `initStatic` method seems not worth doing, IMHO.
>
> Why not simply declare a local variable in the static initializer below?
>
>
> private static final long CURRENT_PID;
> private static final boolean ALLOW_ATTACH_SELF;
> static {
> PrivilegedAction pa = ProcessHandle::current;
> @SuppressWarnings("removal")
> long pid = AccessController.doPrivileged(pa).pid();
> CURRENT_PID = pid;
> String s = VM.getSavedProperty("jdk.attach.allowAttachSelf");
> ALLOW_ATTACH_SELF = "".equals(s) || Boolean.parseBoolean(s);
> }
I've just pushed a commit with a different fix:
private static final long CURRENT_PID = pid();
@SuppressWarnings("removal")
private static long pid() {
PrivilegedAction pa = () -> ProcessHandle.current();
return AccessController.doPrivileged(pa).pid();
}
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v3]
> More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. > > Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names > you like to use. Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: one more refinement - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152/files/774eb9da..2e4a8ba7 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk17=152=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk17=152=01-02 Stats: 6 lines in 1 file changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17 pull/152/head:pull/152 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 23:40:27 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: >> More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. >> >> Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names >> you like to use. > > Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > one more I'm going to move this to jdk18. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 23:55:46 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> src/jdk.attach/share/classes/sun/tools/attach/HotSpotVirtualMachine.java
>> line 53:
>>
>>> 51: private static final long CURRENT_PID =
>>> AccessController.doPrivileged(
>>> 52: (PrivilegedAction)
>>> ProcessHandle::current).pid();
>>> 53:
>>
>> The original code separated out the declaration of the PrivilegedAction to
>> avoid this cast. If you move the code from the original static initializer
>> into a static method that it called from initializer then it might provide
>> you with a cleaner way to refactor this. There are several other places in
>> this patch that could do with similar cleanup.
>
> This cast is only to tell the compiler which overloaded method to call, and I
> don't think there will be a real cast at runtime. It might look a little ugly
> but extracting it into a variable declaration/definition plus a new
> `initStatic` method seems not worth doing, IMHO.
Why not simply declare a local variable in the static initializer below?
private static final long CURRENT_PID;
private static final boolean ALLOW_ATTACH_SELF;
static {
PrivilegedAction pa = ProcessHandle::current;
@SuppressWarnings("removal")
long pid = AccessController.doPrivileged(pa).pid();
CURRENT_PID = pid;
String s = VM.getSavedProperty("jdk.attach.allowAttachSelf");
ALLOW_ATTACH_SELF = "".equals(s) || Boolean.parseBoolean(s);
}
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 16:53:30 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> one more > > src/jdk.attach/share/classes/sun/tools/attach/HotSpotVirtualMachine.java line > 53: > >> 51: private static final long CURRENT_PID = >> AccessController.doPrivileged( >> 52: (PrivilegedAction) >> ProcessHandle::current).pid(); >> 53: > > The original code separated out the declaration of the PrivilegedAction to > avoid this cast. If you move the code from the original static initializer > into a static method that it called from initializer then it might provide > you with a cleaner way to refactor this. There are several other places in > this patch that could do with similar cleanup. This cast is only to tell the compiler which overloaded method to call, and I don't think there will be a real cast at runtime. It might look a little ugly but extracting it into a variable declaration/definition plus a new `initStatic` method seems not worth doing, IMHO. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 23:40:27 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: >> More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. >> >> Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names >> you like to use. > > Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > one more src/jdk.attach/share/classes/sun/tools/attach/HotSpotVirtualMachine.java line 53: > 51: private static final long CURRENT_PID = AccessController.doPrivileged( > 52: (PrivilegedAction) > ProcessHandle::current).pid(); > 53: The original code separated out the declaration of the PrivilegedAction to avoid this cast. If you move the code from the original static initializer into a static method that it called from initializer then it might provide you with a cleaner way to refactor this. There are several other places in this patch that could do with similar cleanup. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 23:40:27 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: >> More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. >> >> Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names >> you like to use. > > Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > one more Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer). - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K [v2]
> More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. > > Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names > you like to use. Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: one more - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152/files/d8b384df..774eb9da Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk17=152=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk17=152=00-01 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 1 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17 pull/152/head:pull/152 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K
On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 20:04:37 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. > > Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names > you like to use. LGTM. - Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
Re: [jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K
On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 20:04:37 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. > > Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names > you like to use. Changes look good Max - Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
[jdk17] RFR: 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K
More refactoring to limit the scope of `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. Sometimes I introduce new methods. Please feel free to suggest method names you like to use. - Commit messages: - 8269409: Post JEP 411 refactoring: core-libs with maximum covering > 10K Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk17=152=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8269409 Stats: 289 lines in 21 files changed: 161 ins; 64 del; 64 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17 pull/152/head:pull/152 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/152
