Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-11 Thread Dan Xu
I see. I was not aware of -Xshare:dump. Thanks, Alan. -Dan On Thu 11 Oct 2012 03:55:34 AM PDT, Alan Bateman wrote: On 11/10/2012 11:42, Alan Bateman wrote: On 10/10/2012 21:18, Dan Xu wrote: Thanks for your good comments. I have changed access modifiers for methods in WinNTFileSystem.java. A

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-11 Thread Alan Bateman
On 11/10/2012 11:42, Alan Bateman wrote: On 10/10/2012 21:18, Dan Xu wrote: Thanks for your good comments. I have changed access modifiers for methods in WinNTFileSystem.java. And the new webrev can be viewed at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev.01/ I did not change the hashCod

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-11 Thread Alan Bateman
On 10/10/2012 21:18, Dan Xu wrote: Thanks for your good comments. I have changed access modifiers for methods in WinNTFileSystem.java. And the new webrev can be viewed at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev.01/ I did not change the hashCode implementation in this version. It will

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-10 Thread Dan Xu
Thanks for your good comments. I have changed access modifiers for methods in WinNTFileSystem.java. And the new webrev can be viewed at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev.01/ I did not change the hashCode implementation in this version. It will need further complete tests and ano

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-10 Thread Alan Bateman
On 09/10/2012 21:02, Dan Xu wrote: : There are no code changes when moving them from Win32FileSystem to WinNTFileSystem. Thanks for confirming, that makes it a lot easier to review. I've looked through the changes and it looks that you've done a very thorough job, thank you! The only thing

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Ulf Zibis
Thanks Zhong, you are correct. So we additionally can save again 1 variable and 2 lines. -Ulf Am 09.10.2012 23:08, schrieb Zhong Yu: Ulf, since allUpper <==> ca==null we don't need allUpper... On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote: Hi, I did not look into the details, but

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Dan Xu
Hi Ulf, I think it is better to focus on the clean-up for my current transaction. The performance improvement of toUpper() method can be another topic for String class. Thanks, -Dan On 10/09/2012 12:31 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote: Hi, I did not look into the details, but the hint about performan

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Dan Xu
On 10/09/2012 12:30 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 09/10/2012 18:46, Dan Xu wrote: Hi folks, Please help review the code change for CR7186817 to remove Windows 95/98/ME support. The webrev has been uploaded to http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev/

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Ulf Zibis
Hi, I did not look into the details, but the hint about performance on String.toLower in WindowsNTFileSystem catched my attention. Here is a very fast converter, which may be enough for calculating the hash: // Private ASCII-only optimized version public static final String toUpper(fi

Re: Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Alan Bateman
On 09/10/2012 18:46, Dan Xu wrote: Hi folks, Please help review the code change for CR7186817 to remove Windows 95/98/ME support. The webrev has been uploaded to http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev/ The main focus of this clean-

Review Request: 7186817 - Remove Windows 95/98/ME Support

2012-10-09 Thread Dan Xu
Hi folks, Please help review the code change for CR7186817 to remove Windows 95/98/ME support. The webrev has been uploaded to http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7186817/webrev/ The main focus of this clean-up is in IO area. And I also cleaned