Re: RFR (JDK11) 8137326: Methods for comparing CharSequence, StringBuilder, and StringBuffer

Joe, In CharSequence, does it make sense to cache the result of the length calculation? As in change: for (int i = 0; i < Math.min(cs1.length(), cs2.length()); i++) { for (int i = 0, len = Math.min(cs1.length(), cs2.length()); i < len; i++) { Jason _

Re: RFR (JDK11) 8137326: Methods for comparing CharSequence, StringBuilder, and StringBuffer

Hi Joe, Looking good, but a few comments: AbstractStringBuilder: 111  the coder() method should be private and since there is only a few uses   the function could be inlined. StringBuffer:192: extra leading space before "}" Thanks, Roger On 2/8/2018 7:47 PM, Joe Wang wrote: Hi all, The CS

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk integration 2018-02

+1 Hans is right that reachabilityFence can be clumsy but it’s the best we have right now. Paul. > On Feb 8, 2018, at 5:19 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/jdk/jsr166-integration/overview.html > >

Re: RFR: 8194154 patch for crash at File.getCanonicalPath()

On 08/02/2018 17:35, yumin qi wrote: HI, Alan   As in your email to RFR of 8194154 which now has a new fix in canonicalize_md.c, switch back to discuss solution here again.   The current fix is not in java, instead, I put it in C function. In the function before the fix, it assumes no more "//

Re: Weird timezone issues with Timestamp.valueOf(String s)

[redirect to core-libs-dev] On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:08 AM, wrote: > Not that I encourage using date/time classes from the packages of either > java.util or java.sql, but sometimes it happens under the hood. > > > > We found a weird issue with timestamps. > > In our (PostgreSQL) database we have

Re: RFR: 8041626: [Event Request] Shutdown reason

Hi David, > On 9 Feb 2018, at 05:22, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Robin, > >> Right, almost all the runtime changes are made in order to try to figure out >> what the process exit code from the launcher will eventually be. For >> example, the launcher returns 1 if the main thread exited with an

Re: RFR: 8041626: [Event Request] Shutdown reason

Hi Erik, > On 7 Feb 2018, at 21:47, Erik Gahlin wrote: > > Hi Robin, > > I can sponsor this. > > I wonder if we should change the name of the event to "Shutdown" instead? It > will give us flexibility to add other shutdown related fields in the future. Makes sense, I’ll rename it. > Could y

Re: RFR: 8041626: [Event Request] Shutdown reason

Hi Roger, > On 8 Feb 2018, at 17:26, Roger Riggs wrote: > > Hi Robin, > > Saving useful information about failures during shutdown is useful. > > Can the shutdown of JFR be put off? Is the use of shutdown hook still > necessary? The part of JFR that manages recordings is written in Java, so