Re: Review request for JDK-8141338: Move jdk.internal.dynalink package to jdk.dynalink

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 23/11/2015 15:27, Attila Szegedi wrote: >> Folks, >> >> I integrated the changes Mandy suggested; please review these (build >> related) changes: >> jdk9 top level: >> <http

Re: Review request for JDK-8141338: Move jdk.internal.dynalink package to jdk.dynalink

ugh to verify that JDK9 builds fine with these changes. Thanks, Attila. > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Attila Szegedi wrote: > > Thanks for pointing out these, Mandy; I will make the changes you suggested. > > Attila. > >> On Nov 20, 2015, at 6:10 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:

Re: Review request for JDK-8141338: Move jdk.internal.dynalink package to jdk.dynalink

On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 19/11/2015 23:15, Attila Szegedi wrote: >> Please review JDK-8141338 "Move jdk.internal.dynalink package to >> jdk.dynalink" for <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8141338>. This >>

Re: Review request for JDK-8135251: Use Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass for loading Nashorn script code

> On Sep 16, 2015, at 2:51 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 16/09/2015 13:28, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> On 2015-09-11 18:00, Attila Szegedi wrote: >>> Please review the revised changes for JDK-8135251 "Use >>> Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass

Re: Review request for JDK-8135251: Use Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass for loading Nashorn script code

What do you mean by “unsafe warning”? > On Sep 13, 2015, at 12:47 PM, Marcus Lagergren wrote: > > +1. Nicely done. > > Does this compile without unsafe warnings, though? > > /M > >> On 11 Sep 2015, at 18:00, Attila Szegedi > <mailto:attila.szeg...@oracle.com>> wrote: >> >> e >

Review request for JDK-8135251: Use Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass for loading Nashorn script code

Please review the revised changes for JDK-8135251 "Use Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass for loading Nashorn script code” The revision incorporates the following changes: - the feature can be disabled by setting the "nashorn.disableVmAnonymousClasses

Re: RFR: JDK-8059135: New Nasgen dependencies to Nashorn breaks the JDK 9 build - bootstrapping problem?

+1 On Oct 2, 2014, at 10:34 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Hello, > > Please review this small patch fixing the bootstrap problem of building > nasgen. To make sure no other nashorn is picked up, force the bootclasspath > to be only the rt.jar of the boot jdk and the newly compiled nashorn classe