Re: RFR: 8248261: Add timestamps to jpackage and jpackage tests verbose output

looks good. /Andy On 7/9/2020 12:02 AM, alexander.matv...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Alexey, http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~almatvee/8248261/webrev.01/ - Added fatalError() to log fatal errors without timestamp. - Added missing timestamp to Log.verbose(Throwable t). Thanks, Alexander On 7/8/20 9:34

Re: RFR [16/java.xml] 8248486: SafeThread illegal access to java.lang private fields should be removed

On 7/10/20 2:25 PM, huizhe.w...@oracle.com wrote: Thanks Chris, Roger, and Mandy.  I've updated the webrev using AtomicInteger and removing java.base export. Here's the updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk16/8248486/webrev/ Looks good. Mandy

Re: RFR [16/java.xml] 8248486: SafeThread illegal access to java.lang private fields should be removed

Thanks Chris, Roger, and Mandy.  I've updated the webrev using AtomicInteger and removing java.base export. Here's the updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk16/8248486/webrev/ -Joe On 7/10/20 9:59 AM, Mandy Chung wrote: Hi Joe, The change looks good.   You can consider using

Re: RFR(S): 8249198: Faster Math.signum(fp) for positive and negative numbers

Hi Dmitry, Regarding the benchmarks [1], I was curious as to why you chose to use the reduce() method, which inside it loops over invocations of signum(), given the considerations discussed in the sample JMHSample_11_Loops.java [2]? Is that in order to force inlining? I have not used the @Compi

Re: RFR: 8245527: LDAP Cnannel Binding support for Java GSS/Kerberos

Hello Aleksei, Thank you for review. Please see my comments below. Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~abakhtin/8245527/webrev.v14/ Regards Alexey > On 10 Jul 2020, at 19:40, Aleks Efimov wrote: > > Hi Alexey, > > Thank you for removing the dependency on the timeout property and addi

Re: RFR(S): 8249198: Faster Math.signum(fp) for positive and negative numbers

Hi Dmitry, On 7/10/2020 12:29 PM, Dmitry Chuyko wrote: Joe, thanks for taking a look on that. Would something like "Here d is either (signed) zero or NaN (JLS 15.20.1)" make more sense? That would be a correct statement. However, rather than referring to the JLS in this case, I suggesting s

Re: RFR(S): 8249198: Faster Math.signum(fp) for positive and negative numbers

Joe, thanks for taking a look on that. Would something like "Here d is either (signed) zero or NaN (JLS 15.20.1)" make more sense? -Dmitry On 7/10/20 10:06 PM, Joe Darcy wrote: Hello, The comment +    // NaN is here by JLS 15.20.1 is not correct; either NaN or (signed) zero is present

Re: RFR(S): 8249198: Faster Math.signum(fp) for positive and negative numbers

Hello, The comment +    // NaN is here by JLS 15.20.1 is not correct; either NaN or (signed) zero is present at that point in the code. -Joe On 7/10/2020 11:11 AM, Dmitry Chuyko wrote: Hello, Please review a small change in Math.signum(double d) and Math.signum(float f) that improves

RFR(S): 8249198: Faster Math.signum(fp) for positive and negative numbers

Hello, Please review a small change in Math.signum(double d) and Math.signum(float f) that improves performance for positive and negative numbers. Current version first checks if the number is NaN or zero, and for all other numbers it extracts sign bit and constructs fp result. That makes a

Re: RFR [16/java.xml] 8248486: SafeThread illegal access to java.lang private fields should be removed

Hi Joe, The change looks good.   You can consider using AtomicInteger for the thread number.  Looks like this is the only use of jdk.internal.misc from java.xml.   You can remove the qualified exports from java.base to java.xml. $ ./bin/jdeps -verbose:class -p jdk.internal.misc modules/java.

Re: RFR: 8245527: LDAP Cnannel Binding support for Java GSS/Kerberos

Hi Alexey, Thank you for removing the dependency on the timeout property and adding tests for TLS handshake cases. Please, find the comments about the latest webrev below: Not quite sure why the CF is completed at two places. Probably that’s OK, but it would be good to know the reason :) T

Re: RFR [16/java.xml] 8248486: SafeThread illegal access to java.lang private fields should be removed

> On 9 Jul 2020, at 23:23, huizhe.w...@oracle.com wrote: > > ... > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk16/8248486/webrev/ > Looks good. Reviewed. -Chris.

Re: RFR[8238286]: 'Add new flatMap stream operation that is more amenable to pushing’

Hi Peter, Thanks for your feedback, and for pointing out these mistakes. I’ve rectified this now, and you can find the latest changes in the new webrev and specdiff below. webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8238286/webrevs/webrev.04/ specdiff: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/