> Please review a patch to add support for Markdown syntax in documentation
> comments, as described in the associated JEP.
>
> Notable features:
>
> * support for `///` documentation comments in `JavaTokenizer`
> * new module `jdk.internal.md` -- a private copy of the `commonmark-java`
>
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 16:59:04 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> Musing on this more.
>
> Can/should we, without introducing probably unwelcome `Kind.MD` to
> `javax.tools.JavaFileObject.Kind`, teach javac to recognise `package.md`
> similarly to how it recognises legacy `package.html`? If we are
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:38:56 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:35:00 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:08:54 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:37:04 GMT, Andrey Turbanov wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Address review comments
>
> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/parser/DocCommentParser.java
>
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:13:38 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:25:37 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/parser/DocCommentParser.java
>> line 89:
>>
>>> 87: POSTAMBLE,
>>> 88: /** The rich-text content of an inline documentation comment
>>> tag. */
>>> 89:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 12:30:09 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 16:49:31 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 16:02:12 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:24:01 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/source/doctree/RawTextTree.java line
>> 40:
>>
>>> 38: * @apiNote
>>> 39: * This class may be used to represent tree nodes containing
>>> 40: * {@linkplain DocTree.Kind#MARKDOWN Markdown}
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:20:56 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 14:28:45 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 12:08:19 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional
>>
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:13:40 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Understood. FWIW, here are a few examples of headings in user-defined tags
>> in JDK:
>>
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/a6785e4d633908596ddb6de6d2eeab1c9ebdf2c3/src/java.base/share/classes/java/math/BigDecimal.java#L229-L239
> Please review a patch to add support for Markdown syntax in documentation
> comments, as described in the associated JEP.
>
> Notable features:
>
> * support for `///` documentation comments in `JavaTokenizer`
> * new module `jdk.internal.md` -- a private copy of the `commonmark-java`
>
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:03:42 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> This PR proposes to remove the snippet files in
>> `java/lang/foreign/snippet-files` from the build.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Correct path to
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:54:35 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
> Why not CFLAGS_OS_DEF_JVM="-DAIX -D_LARGE_FILES" as the equivalent on Linux
I think this PR is intended to be just about the JDK libs, not JVM compilation.
-
PR Review Comment:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:41:29 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> In the same spirit as
>> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
>> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
>> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:48:40 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>
> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to use
> Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
src/java.prefs/unix/native/libprefs/FileSystemPreferences.c
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
src/java.base/share/native/libjli/wildcard.c line 109:
>
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:07:49 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> src/java.base/unix/native/libjava/UnixFileSystem_md.c line
> This PR proposes to remove the snippet files in
> `java/lang/foreign/snippet-files` from the build.
Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Correct path to excluded directory
-
Changes:
- all:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 13:27:25 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> If possible, we should simply exclude all files in directories that have `-`
>> (minus sign) in their name; this is the intentional design to prevent javac
>> from compiling those classes as package names cannot include `-`.
>
> I
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
make/autoconf/flags-cflags.m4 line 488:
> 486:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:44:34 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the same spirit as
> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
I put it into our build/test patch list to see how it
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:44:34 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the same spirit as
> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
Build changes look good.
-
Marked as reviewed
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:44:34 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the same spirit as
> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:44:34 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the same spirit as
> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
Not that it means much coming from me, but the build
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 16:07:51 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [9049402a](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/9049402a1b9394095b04287eef1f2d46c4da60e9)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
>
> The commit being
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:50:19 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> This pull request contains a backport of commit
>> [9049402a](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/9049402a1b9394095b04287eef1f2d46c4da60e9)
>> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
>>
>> The commit being
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
I have searched the code base to the extend of my ability,
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
I'm keeping this as draft until I've figured out how what
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:42:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
(I'll try look at this during this week.)
-
Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
native libraries.
-
Commit messages:
- Rollback AIX changes since they are now tracked in JDK-8324834
- Remove superfluous setting
In the same spirit as
[JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt the
AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define _LARGE_FILES, this will
make `` behave as `64`, just as _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:23:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> To really "unpin" msys would be to require just a specific major version,
> like `msys2/setup-msys2@v2`. You are not doing that, and I don't recommend
> doing that. :-)
Right. I meant to say that we are effectively undoing the
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:39:44 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> This gives me even more confidence in msys2 unpinning :)
Sounds great! As @jaikiran said, we could pin again if it re-surfaces.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17572#issuecomment-1914429753
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:11:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Thanks for doing this cleanup! Seems fine to me. Not really sure how to test
> the msys2 pinning issue...
[We pinned it](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8310259) because there were
weird failures in jtreg builds on Windows due to
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>>
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3,
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more
52 matches
Mail list logo
