Re: RFR - JDK-8223780 String::translateEscapes (Preview)

Hi Jim! I wonder why it was chosen to represent octal values as \[0-3][0-9][0-9] | \[0-9][0-9] | \[0-9] ? First, it will allow multiple leading zeroes. Second, it does not require a leading zero, while, I think, many users are used to octal numbers starting with a mandatory leading zero. W

Re: RFR 8213031: (zipfs) Add support for POSIX file permissions

On 26/05/2019 21:54, Langer, Christoph wrote: : It's alright as it is. If you look at the source of AccessController.doPrivileged for a PrivilegedExceptionAction, you will see that RuntimeExceptions are caught and rethrown, not yielding a PAE. So I must catch UOE here explicitly because it's a

Re: RFR (M): JDK-6394757: rev1: AbstractSet.removeAll semantics are surprisingly dependent on relative sizes

Would you care to elaborate on that? As far as I understand Stuart was simply working around javadoc's bug in the "Copying of Method Comments" algorithm. > On 26 May 2019, at 17:25, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > This is yet another symptom of Java's fundamental design mistake of being > unable to s

Re: JDK 13 RFR of JDK-8224783: Javadoc of String strip methods uses link where linkplain would be better

+1 > On May 24, 2019, at 10:15 PM, Joe Darcy wrote: > > Hello, > > Please review the patch below to address: > > JDK-8224783: Javadoc of String strip methods uses link where linkplain > would be better > > Thanks, > > -Joe > > diff -r 4947a097db60 src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/

Re: RFR (CSR) - JDK-8223776 String::stripIndent (Preview)

I think I have to leave it as is, since the Javadoc will become THE spec for text blocks, i.e., there is a direct correspondence between the JavaDoc and the JEP. > On May 24, 2019, at 6:00 PM, Brent Christian > wrote: > > Hi, > > In the description of the re-indentation algorithm, I think it

Re: RFR 8216553: JrtFIleSystemProvider getPath(URI) omits /modules element from file path

On 27/05/2019 10:18, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: Please review. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8216553 Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8216553/webrev.00/ This addresses the points we discussed in the JIRA issue so I think it looks good. -Alan

Re: RFR 8216553: JrtFIleSystemProvider getPath(URI) omits /modules element from file path

+1 > On May 27, 2019, at 6:18 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan > wrote: > > Please review. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8216553 > Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8216553/webrev.00/ > > Thanks, > -Sundar > >

RFR 8216553: JrtFIleSystemProvider getPath(URI) omits /modules element from file path

Please review. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8216553 Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8216553/webrev.00/ Thanks, -Sundar

Re: Thread stack size issue related to glibc TLS bug

* Martin Buchholz: > Very big picture - if we want to banish stack overflows forever, we would > need to migrate the industry to split runtime stacks, which would add a bit > of runtime overhead to every native function call. No one is heroic enough > to make progress towards that. Maybe develop

Re: RFR (M): JDK-6394757: rev1: AbstractSet.removeAll semantics are surprisingly dependent on relative sizes

On 5/26/19 6:25 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:29 PM Stuart Marks wrote: - addition of FIXME comment and reference to javadoc bug report, where doc comment from interface cannot be inherited This is yet another symptom of Java's fundamental design mistake of being