Re: RFR: jdk10: 8169646: Remove launcher's -d32/-d64 option

2017-05-09 Thread David Holmes
Hi Kumar, Changes look good to me! Thanks, David On 10/05/2017 5:45 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote: Hi David, I have made the following changes: 1. Removed the launcher's check for model flags, allowing the VM to process and fail, aligned the test ChangeDataModel to the VM's message. 2. Fix

RFR: 8180041 Fix HTML 5 issues in java.corba

2017-05-09 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
Another review for HTML 5 fixes, this time in the java.corba module. As usual, changes are just to the markup, and not to any specification text. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180041 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/8180041/webrev.00/ -- Jon

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8179868: Java API Docs of javax.xml.transform.stax contains TODOs

2017-05-09 Thread huizhe wang
Thanks Lance! Joe On 5/9/2017 3:54 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: Hi Joe, Definitely reads much better On May 9, 2017, at 6:51 PM, Brian Burkhalter mailto:brian.burkhal...@oracle.com>> wrote: Hi Joe, The verbiage looks good (certainly much better than TODO), but the new copyright year is now

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8179868: Java API Docs of javax.xml.transform.stax contains TODOs

2017-05-09 Thread huizhe wang
On 5/9/2017 3:51 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: Hi Joe, The verbiage looks good (certainly much better than TODO), but the new copyright year is now 20017. ;-) wow, predicting copyright 18,000 years ahead of time, am I :-) Fixed. Thanks, Joe Thanks, Brian On May 9, 2017, at 3:15 PM, huiz

Re: RFR 9 test-only RFR 8177328 : java/lang/ClassLoader/securityManager/ClassLoaderTest.java times out with -Xcomp

2017-05-09 Thread Brent Christian
On 5/9/17 4:27 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8177328/webrev.01/ Thanks for the clean up. Does each @run action need 4 mins timeout? Can it restore to the default timeout? Yes. Between the additional @runs and no longer testing automated modules, I b

Re: RFR 9 test-only RFR 8177328 : java/lang/ClassLoader/securityManager/ClassLoaderTest.java times out with -Xcomp

2017-05-09 Thread Mandy Chung
> On May 9, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Brent Christian > > I've removed the test case for automatic modules, and added a @run action for > each policy file + system classloader configuration. I also removed the code > to compile test sources, using @build instead. > > I also made some (hopefully) cla

Re: RFR 9 test-only RFR 8177328 : java/lang/ClassLoader/securityManager/ClassLoaderTest.java times out with -Xcomp

2017-05-09 Thread Brent Christian
Brent Christian wrote: > Mandy Chung wrote: >> >> I think we could take out the automatic module case as named module >> would verify it. One refactor you can consider by separating them >> in several @run actions. ... I think it would make the test easier to read and understand the cases it co

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8179868: Java API Docs of javax.xml.transform.stax contains TODOs

2017-05-09 Thread Lance Andersen
Hi Joe, Definitely reads much better > On May 9, 2017, at 6:51 PM, Brian Burkhalter > wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > The verbiage looks good (certainly much better than TODO), but the new > copyright year is now 20017. ;-) > > Thanks, > > Brian > > On May 9, 2017, at 3:15 PM, huizhe wang wrote:

Re: RFR (JAXP) 8179868: Java API Docs of javax.xml.transform.stax contains TODOs

2017-05-09 Thread Brian Burkhalter
Hi Joe, The verbiage looks good (certainly much better than TODO), but the new copyright year is now 20017. ;-) Thanks, Brian On May 9, 2017, at 3:15 PM, huizhe wang wrote: > Hi, > > Please review a fix for stax's package description. This is in a format > similar to its SAX/DOM/Stream cou

RFR (JAXP) 8179868: Java API Docs of javax.xml.transform.stax contains TODOs

2017-05-09 Thread huizhe wang
Hi, Please review a fix for stax's package description. This is in a format similar to its SAX/DOM/Stream counterparts. For JDK 10, we could consider converting to package-info.java. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179868 webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8179868/

Re: RFR: jdk10: 8169646: Remove launcher's -d32/-d64 option

2017-05-09 Thread Kumar Srinivasan
Hi David, I have made the following changes: 1. Removed the launcher's check for model flags, allowing the VM to process and fail, aligned the test ChangeDataModel to the VM's message. 2. Fixed up all the pre-existing conditions, pointed out earlier. Full webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.ne

Re: Review Request: JDK-8179950: Custom system class loader using Enum.valueOf in its initialization triggers java.lang.InternalError

2017-05-09 Thread Mandy Chung
> On May 9, 2017, at 10:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 09/05/2017 17:58, Mandy Chung wrote: >> Webrev: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8179950/webrev.00/index.html >> >> This is a regression caused by JDK-8020801 that the initialization of a >> custom system c

Re: Review Request: JDK-8179950: Custom system class loader using Enum.valueOf in its initialization triggers java.lang.InternalError

2017-05-09 Thread Alan Bateman
On 09/05/2017 17:58, Mandy Chung wrote: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8179950/webrev.00/index.html This is a regression caused by JDK-8020801 that the initialization of a custom system class loader hits a code path that checks if a class is loaded by the platform

Re: Review Request: JDK-8179950: Custom system class loader using Enum.valueOf in its initialization triggers java.lang.InternalError

2017-05-09 Thread Lance Andersen
looks fine Mandy... > On May 9, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: > > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8179950/webrev.00/index.html > > This is a regression caused by JDK-8020801 that the initialization of a > custom system class loader hits a code path that checks

Re: Review Request: JDK-8179950: Custom system class loader using Enum.valueOf in its initialization triggers java.lang.InternalError

2017-05-09 Thread Daniel Fuchs
Looks good to me Mandy! Nice test :-) best regards, -- daniel On 09/05/2017 17:58, Mandy Chung wrote: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8179950/webrev.00/index.html This is a regression caused by JDK-8020801 that the initialization of a custom system class loader hit

Review Request: JDK-8179950: Custom system class loader using Enum.valueOf in its initialization triggers java.lang.InternalError

2017-05-09 Thread Mandy Chung
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8179950/webrev.00/index.html This is a regression caused by JDK-8020801 that the initialization of a custom system class loader hits a code path that checks if a class is loaded by the platform class loader. Such code path should not cal

Re: RFC on 8179662: OutputStreamWriter javadocs states that you can set the buffer size but there is no way to do that

2017-05-09 Thread Roger Riggs
+1 On 5/8/2017 9:54 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: I agree. I would opt for (A) and be done with it. On May 8, 2017, at 6:38 PM, Brian Goetz wrote: Given that this went unnoticed for 18 years, the urgency seems low. Either (a) or (b) sound fine to me. (c) sounds like a recipe for spending mo

Re: Long.bitCount micro-optimization

2017-05-09 Thread Maurizio Cimadamore
To expand a bit on Martin's point - I think your benchmark should include a 'baseline' version of bitCountInt/bitCountLong whose implementation simply delegates to the JDK methods (Integer.bitCount/Long.bitCount) - I see that bitCount is on the list of supported intrinsics [1], so, by adding th

Re: Long.bitCount micro-optimization

2017-05-09 Thread Isaac Levy
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 10:54 PM Martin Buchholz wrote: > > Being able to do better here is very impressive. > > I took a quick look and found two things that a paranoid benchmarker like > myself would not have done: > - write the benchmark in scala instead of boring java > - use jdk8 instead of "

Re: RFR [9] 8179021: Latest bugfixes to WebSocket/HPACK from the sandbox repo

2017-05-09 Thread Pavel Rappo
This thread has just moved to net-dev mailing list: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2017-May/010785.html Sorry for the noise, thanks. > On 20 Apr 2017, at 17:08, Pavel Rappo wrote: > > Hello, > > Please review the following change: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/81

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8179662: OutputStreamWriter javadocs states that you can set the buffer size but there is no way to do that

2017-05-09 Thread Lance Andersen
+1 > On May 8, 2017, at 10:28 PM, Brian Burkhalter > wrote: > > Please review this doc-only change [2] for [1] at your convenience with > reference to [3]. > > Thanks, > > Brian > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179662 > [2] diff > > --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/io

Re: RFR 10 JDK-8159995: Rename internal Unsafe.compare methods

2017-05-09 Thread Andrew Haley
On 08/05/17 22:43, Paul Sandoz wrote: >> Given any "swap(exp, new)" function can be implemented as >> "exchange(exp, new) == exp" I'm not sure why we have two complete >> sets of functions all the way through. But I guess that is a >> different issue. :) > > Yes, it might be possible after some ca

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8179662: OutputStreamWriter javadocs states that you can set the buffer size but there is no way to do that

2017-05-09 Thread Chris Hegarty
> On 9 May 2017, at 03:28, Brian Burkhalter wrote: > > Please review this doc-only change [2] for [1] at your convenience with > reference to [3]. > > Thanks, > > Brian > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179662 > [2] diff > > --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/OutputSt