Re: RFR: regex changes -- sun.security.util.Debug issue

Hi, While testing for the attached regex changes, a fatal vm init error was triggered for test case with -Djava.security.debug=xyz turned on, as showed in following stacktrace. It appears sun.security.util.Debug is being initialized even before the lambda is ready for use, and unfortunately

Re: outOfBoundsExceptionFormatter needs @since 9

> On 9 May 2016, at 22:26, Paul Benedict wrote: > > As subject line says. It's not present in 9b116 > It was recently moved to an internal package: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/jdk/file/tip/src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/util/Preconditions.java

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8156513: Problem list javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java

On 5/9/2016 7:16 PM, Amy Lu wrote: On 5/10/16 6:36 AM, huizhe wang wrote: I assume this is an intermittent failure. It looks like the newly added module tests were interfering with this test. Hi, Joe If jdk/lib/stax.properties exist (created by FactoryFindTest.java),

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8156513: Problem list javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java

On 5/10/16 6:36 AM, huizhe wang wrote: I assume this is an intermittent failure. It looks like the newly added module tests were interfering with this test. Hi, Joe If jdk/lib/stax.properties exist (created by FactoryFindTest.java), BasicModularXMLParserTest.java and

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8156513: Problem list javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java

On 5/9/16 11:46 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: Hi Amy, Looks fine to add to the problem list. It looks like that ProblemList.txt has not been converted to use the new format with the bug number as the second field. Yes, noticed. I created RFE JDK-8156598 to track the format change. Thank you for

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Roger, So modified: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8130679/webrev.01/ Thanks, Brian On May 9, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > Yes, I think that works well. > > On 5/9/16 5:15 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: >> >> So do you think that this form for example: >>

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8156513: Problem list javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java

I assume this is an intermittent failure. It looks like the newly added module tests were interfering with this test. -Joe On 5/9/2016 8:46 AM, Roger Riggs wrote: Hi Amy, Looks fine to add to the problem list. It looks like that ProblemList.txt has not been converted to use the new format

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8152912: SAX XMLReaderFactory needs to be ServiceLoader compliant

Thanks Daniel! On 5/9/2016 4:05 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote: Hi Joe, This looks much better to me. I just wonder about the @Deprecated("5") vs @Deprecated("1.5") Yes, the compiler accepted it just fine and produced javadocs similar to that of XMLReaderFactory where since="9". Best, Joe We

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Brian, Yes, I think that works well. Roger On 5/9/16 5:15 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: Hi Roger, So do you think that this form for example: (common prefix) * @throws IndexOutOfBoundsException * If {@code off} is negative, or {@code len} is negative, *

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Roger, So do you think that this form for example: (common prefix) * @throws IndexOutOfBoundsException * If {@code off} is negative, or {@code len} is negative, * or {@code off + len} is negative or greater than the length (array suffix) * of

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Brian, On 5/9/2016 4:11 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: Hi Roger, Thanks for taking a close look at this. On May 9, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Roger Riggs > wrote: In the @throws IndexOutOfBounds I think it is easier to understand to say * or

outOfBoundsExceptionFormatter needs @since 9

As subject line says. It's not present in 9b116 Cheers, Paul

Re: [9] RFR: 8152207: Perform array bound checks while getting a length of bytecode instructions

> On May 4, 2016, at 1:48 PM, Artem Smotrakov > wrote: > > Hello, > > Please review two small patches for jdk and hotspot repos which add array > bound checks to functions which return a length of bytecode instruction. > > Please see details in

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Roger, Thanks for taking a close look at this. On May 9, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > In the @throws IndexOutOfBounds I think it is easier to understand to say > > * or {@code off + len} is greater than {@code cbuf.length} > > It matches the code more

Re: RFR: 8155795: Optimize Integer/Long.reverse by using reverseBytes

Hi guys, I have looked at generated asm, it does not seem there is problem, only little different order of shifts and ands.. Plus, at haswell, times do not differ so much. Here are different parts: Slower version: 057 sallR10, #24 05b movlR11, RAX# spill 05e sall

Re: RFR [9] 8153737: Unsupported Module

Fixed in JBoss Marshalling upstream. Thanks, Rio On 04/27/2016 11:54 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: Hi Rio, We are missing sun/reflect/ReflectionFactory$GetReflectionFactoryAction inner class in jdk.unsupported module: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8130679: Writer/StringWriter.write methods do not specify index out bounds

Hi Brian, In the @throws IndexOutOfBounds I think it is easier to understand to say * or {@code off + len} is greater than {@code cbuf.length} It matches the code more closely. - Is not clear why the form of the added @throws is different between the methods (other than len = string.size()

Re: RFR:JDK-8155823: Add date-time patterns 'v' and 'vvvv'

Hi Nadeesh, java/time/format/DateTimeFormatter.java: line 312 - Move 'v' up 1 line so it is after 'V' and before 'z'. Also in DateTimeFormatterBuilder.java: line 1415+ - the description of the number of letters does not need to be repeated; put one copy before the specifics of 'z' and

Re: RFR(m): 8139233u1 add initial compact immutable collection implementations

Hi Stephen, you may right :) First note that the Enum values are used as an ephemeral state, the serialized form still uses an integer as the original code. You can also note that the enum is not loaded if no immutable collection is serialized (because CollSer is not initialized). It's just a

Re: RFR: JDK-8149925 We don't need jdk.internal.ref.Cleaner any more

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Roger Riggs wrote: > I'm not sure I understand what > > "a CompletableFuture-based API for cleanup actions." > > would look like or how it would be used. I'm fuzzy myself, but the idea is that any asynchronous action that will be completed

Re: RFR: JDK-8149925 We don't need jdk.internal.ref.Cleaner any more

Hi Martin, I added a link to these notes to the JDK-8144531 Cleanup of Cleaner implementation. I'm not sure I understand what "a CompletableFuture-based API for cleanup actions." would look like or how it would be used. Thanks, Roger On

Re: RFR:JDK-8155823: Add date-time patterns 'v' and 'vvvv'

This line: * v generic time-zone name zone-name Pacific Standard Time; PT should be * v generic time-zone name zone-name Pacific Time; PT Missing space before "false" at line 1226: appendInternal(new ZoneTextPrinterParser(textStyle,

Re: RFR(m): 8139233u1 add initial compact immutable collection implementations

On 9 May 2016 at 15:25, Remi Forax wrote: > CollSer implementation can be improved to avoid the ugly switch/case by > replacing the constant list by an enum, CollSer is modelled on JSR-310 code which uses an int. An enum would be a huge overkill for this use case. Stephen

[PATCH] JDK-8155102: Process.toString could include pid, isAlive, exitStatus

Hello, I have added toString() method in Process.java. diff --git a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Process.java b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Process.java --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Process.java +++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Process.java @@ -548,5

RFR:JDK-8155823: Add date-time patterns 'v' and 'vvvv'

Hi all, Reposting because subject line did not follow the format. Bug Id : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8155823 Issue: Add date-time patterns 'v' and '' webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8155823/webrev.03/ This webrev also contain the fix of related bug

Re: RFR: JDK-8149925 We don't need jdk.internal.ref.Cleaner any more

I haven't been following along with the long review thread, but I took a look at the new Cleaner stuff and have some belated comments: --- Please add missing semicolon: *private final Cleaner.Cleanable cleanable --- The below looks non-sensical; maybe should return EV_CLEAR if some

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8156513: Problem list javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java

Hi Amy, Looks fine to add to the problem list. It looks like that ProblemList.txt has not been converted to use the new format with the bug number as the second field. Roger On 5/9/2016 1:14 AM, Amy Lu wrote: javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/stream/FactoryFindTest.java This jaxp test creates and

Re: RFR 8155088, Fix module dependencies in java/sql/* and javax/* tests

Hi Alan, updated the fix. Divide into two webrevs for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7901671 Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8155088/webrev.02_se/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8155088/webrev.02_ee/ I suggest to push the first one currently. And file

Add date-time patterns 'v' and 'vvvv'

Hi all, Bug Id : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8155823 Issue: Add date-time patterns 'v' and '' webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8155823/webrev.03/ This webrev also contain the fix of related bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154567 as part of this.

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8155102: Process.toString could include pid, isAlive, exitStatus

Hi Andrey, Since toString is a public method it needs to provide complete javadoc specification as providing values for debugging information. ToString methods typically directly reflect the state of the fields of the object. Why should the exitValue have the value of the pid if the process

Re: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

Hi, It may be useful to include a description of the set as being a 'snapshot'. Now that registerProvider0 is synchronized, there seems little point to having ZONES be a ConcurrentHashMap. An unmodifiable map that is replaced when a new provider is added would have the benefits of

Re: RFR(m): 8139233u1 add initial compact immutable collection implementations

Hi Stuart, I still think that the code of hasNext of the iterator of SetN and MapN should not do any side effect. otherwise, in the constructor of MapN, you can declare k and v as Object (the table is an array of Object and probe() now takes an Object) also instead of InternalError, i

Add date-time patterns 'v' and 'vvvv'

Hi all, Bug Id : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8155823 Issue: Add date-time patterns 'v' and '' webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8155823/webrev.03/ This webrev also contain the fix of related bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154567 as part of this. --

Re: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

Hi, The behavioral change to getAvailableZoneIds will get the greatest attention by the folks concerned with compatibility. Be prepared to make the case that the change will not affect existing applications. Having to modify an existing compatibility test is a warning that it is likely to be

Re: Proposed patch: further wrapping of FileInputStream's native method

On 09/05/2016 14:26, Chris Hegarty wrote: The changes in your patch look ok. It is not clear, at least to me, why these methods are all that interesting, or even why they were not covered by 8054720. Maybe Brian Burkhalter, or others may know. The changes look okay to me but just to mention

Re: Proposed patch: further wrapping of FileInputStream's native method

The changes in your patch look ok. It is not clear, at least to me, why these methods are all that interesting, or even why they were not covered by 8054720. Maybe Brian Burkhalter, or others may know. -Chris. On 09/05/16 04:27, Chan, Sunny wrote: Previously in

Re: RFR: JDK-8151914 java/util/jar/JarFile/MultiReleaseJar* tests do not declare module dependences

On 05/05/16 19:42, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Chris, could you please take another look: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8151914/webrev.02/ This looks ok to me Shura, maybe just 'mrjar' for the directory name? Since there are file moves can you please prepare the changeset, and I

Re: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

Fine by me, just awaiting an additional reviewer. Stephen On 9 May 2016 at 12:42, Bhanu Gopularam wrote: > Here is the updated webrev: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bgopularam/bhanu/JDK-8066291/webrev.03/ > > Please review the changes. > > Thanks, > Bhanu >

RE: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

Here is the updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bgopularam/bhanu/JDK-8066291/webrev.03/ Please review the changes. Thanks, Bhanu -Original Message- From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:scolebou...@joda.org] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 4:43 PM To: core-libs-dev Subject: Re: RFR

Re: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

One point - the Javadoc for the method on ZoneRulesProvider @return a modifiable copy of the set of zone IDs, not null needs to change to @return the unmodifiable set of zone IDs, not null I'd welcome a second review on the volatile / thread-safety aspects, although I think it is pretty simple

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8152912: SAX XMLReaderFactory needs to be ServiceLoader compliant

Hi Joe, This looks much better to me. I just wonder about the @Deprecated("5") vs @Deprecated("1.5") We started dropping the 1. for Java 5 - so I guess @Deprecated("5") is OK. Hopefully Joe Darcy will be able to confirm :-) best regards, -- daniel On 04/05/16 02:22, huizhe wang wrote: On

RE: RFR 8066291: ZoneIdPrinterParser can be optimized

Hi all, Here is the updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bgopularam/bhanu/JDK-8066291/webrev.02/ I have included newly suggested changes. On test side, I had to cleanup test java/time/zone/TCKZoneRulesProvider.java (test_getAvailableGroupIds) as ZoneRulesProvider.getAvailableZoneIds()

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8156512: Mark several tests from java/nio as intermittently failing

On 09/05/2016 11:00, Amy Lu wrote: On 5/9/16 5:31 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: Amy, I think we should put DeleteInterference.java on the exclude list (linux-all) until the issue is tracked down. Also FileSystem/Basic.java seems to be an infrastructure/environment issue so `@key intermittent`

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8156512: Mark several tests from java/nio as intermittently failing

On 5/9/16 5:31 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: Amy, I think we should put DeleteInterference.java on the exclude list (linux-all) until the issue is tracked down. Also FileSystem/Basic.java seems to be an infrastructure/environment issue so `@key intermittent` doesn't seem right. The rest look

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8156512: Mark several tests from java/nio as intermittently failing

Amy, I think we should put DeleteInterference.java on the exclude list (linux-all) until the issue is tracked down. Also FileSystem/Basic.java seems to be an infrastructure/environment issue so `@key intermittent` doesn't seem right. The rest look okay. -Alan

JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8156512: Mark several tests from java/nio as intermittently failing

java/nio/file/WatchService/DeleteInterference.java java/nio/channels/AsynchronousSocketChannel/Basic.java java/nio/file/FileSystem/Basic.java java/nio/channels/FileChannel/InterruptMapDeadlock.java Above nio tests are known to fail intermittently. This patch is to mark the test accordingly with