On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:33:30 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> This PR limits the number of cases in which we deoptimize frames when
>> closing a shared Arena. The initial intent of this was to improve the
>> performance of shared arena closure in cases where a lot of threads are
>> accessing and
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 10:50:34 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> This is what I was thinking of as well. close() on a shared arena can be
> called by any thread, so it would be possible to have an executor service
> with 1-n threads that is dedicated to closing memory.
This delays both the closing of
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:59:26 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> This PR limits the number of cases in which we deoptimize frames when
>> closing a shared Arena. The initial intent of this was to improve the
>> performance of shared arena closure in cases where a lot of threads are
>> accessing and
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:59:26 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> This PR limits the number of cases in which we deoptimize frames when
>> closing a shared Arena. The initial intent of this was to improve the
>> performance of shared arena closure in cases where a lot of threads are
>> accessing and
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 12:52:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Gatherer and primitive specialization
> Hi Rémi,
> Given that Collector has not been specialized since
Hello,
the Gatherer API do not provide primitive specialization while intermediate
methods like map(), flatMap() or mapMulti() do.
Unlike collectors where it is okay to not be specialized because most
collectors mutate a collection that is not specialized too,
gatherers can process/transform
On Thu, 30 May 2024 12:50:36 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
> Extracting duplicate method references to static field reduce proxy class
> spinning and loading. In this case 2 less classes loaded when using
> `findAny()` on each type of stream.
For constant method reference, the solution is to use
> From: "-"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "Chen Liang" , "core-libs-dev"
> , "hotspot-dev" ,
> "kulla-dev"
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 2:56:58 PM
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8242888: Convert dynamic proxy to hidden classes
- Original Message -
> From: "Chen Liang"
> To: "core-libs-dev" , "hotspot-dev"
> , kulla-...@openjdk.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 1:28:01 PM
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8242888: Convert dynamic proxy to hidden classes
> On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:28:30 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>
>> Please
On Wed, 15 May 2024 11:27:04 GMT, ExE Boss wrote:
>>> Maybe export this interface to `jdk.unsupported`?
>>
>> I don't we should do that. In general, we need jdk.unsupported to go away in
>> the long term. Also integrity of the platform depends on java.base being
>> very stingy and not
On Tue, 7 May 2024 16:09:08 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> I do not think the step to "standardise" a preview feature exists ? When a
>> preview feature becomes a released feature, the code is very lightly edited,
>> at least it this is my experience.
>>
>> You can change both readln and
On Tue, 7 May 2024 11:00:52 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/io/JdkConsoleImpl.java line 74:
>>
>>> 72:
>>> 73: @Override
>>> 74: public String readln(String prompt) {
>>
>> this code can be simplified using an early return (and the body of the
>>
On Mon, 6 May 2024 21:45:12 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> Please review this PR which introduces the `java.io.IO` top-level class and
> three methods to `java.io.Console` for [Implicitly Declared Classes and
> Instance Main Methods (Third Preview)].
>
> This PR has been obtained as `git merge
> From: "David Alayachew"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "ІП-24 Олександр Ротань" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2024 11:02:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Addition of Predicate-based findIndex and findLastIndex methods
> to
>
Hello,
for me, it seems what you want is Collector on Stream which is able to
short-circuit,
so you can write
list.stream().collect(Collectors.findFirst(s -> s.contains("o")))
and in reverse
list.reversed().stream().collect(Collectors.findFirst(s -> s.contains("o")))
Using a Stream here is
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:53:01 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This PR implements Gatherer-inspired encoding of `flatMap` that shows that
>> it is both competitive performance-wise as well as improve correctness.
>>
>> Below is the performance of `Stream::flatMap` (for reference types):
>>
>>
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:53:01 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This PR implements Gatherer-inspired encoding of `flatMap` that shows that
>> it is both competitive performance-wise as well as improve correctness.
>>
>> Below is the performance of `Stream::flatMap` (for reference types):
>>
>>
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:53:01 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This PR implements Gatherer-inspired encoding of `flatMap` that shows that
>> it is both competitive performance-wise as well as improve correctness.
>>
>> Below is the performance of `Stream::flatMap` (for reference types):
>>
>>
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 12:01:49 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
> This patch suggests a workaround to an issue with huge SCF MH expression
> trees taking excessive JIT compilation resources by reviving (part of) the
> simple bytecode-generating strategy that was originally available as an
>
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 2:45:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
> As a (related) s
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 2:34:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
> Presuming that you mea
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 10:06:27 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
>> The flags ar
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 4:22:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
> Hi Rémi,
Hello,
>
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 5:14:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
>> And for A.andThen(B)
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 9:00:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer API : wildcards complaint
> Ah, now I see what you mean! Thank you \uD83D\uDC4D
> The reason for t
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev" , "Paul Sandoz"
>
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 3:36:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
> I suspect that it is a ra
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 8:48:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer: spliterator characteristics are not propagated
> Hi Rémi,
> You can find some of my benches here: [
> htt
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 6:01:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Seing a Collector as a Gatherer
> Hi Rémi,
> Yes, this was something I was hoping to get into the preview, but I wasn't
> sure
> where that
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 5:49:01 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherer API : wildcards complaint
> Hi Rémi,
> Thank you for the feedback—examples would be much appreciated
Hello,
I may have overlook that, but it seems there is no method to see a Collector as
a Gatherer.
A Gatherer is more general than a Collector and a Gatherer with a greedy
integrator that does not call Downstream.push in the intergator and only once
is the finisher is basicaly a Collector.
In
Hello,
this is a minor complaint but I do not see a raison to not getting this right.
Currently the Gatherer API does not use the wildcard correctly, which is not
fully an issue because there is "enough" wildcards that if you rely on the
inference, it will work.
The problem is that when you
that this intermediate operation keep the size, which is important if the
terminal operation is toList() because if the size is known, toList() will
presize the List and avoid the creation of an intermediary ArrayList.
See
https://github.com/forax/we_are_all_to_gather/blob/master/src/main/java/com/gihtub/forax
Hello,
i've played quite a lot with the Gatherer API and overall, i quite like how
things work conceptually.
But i think the public API can be improved.
First, the documentation is not fully clear that a Gatherer has 3
characteristics,
1/ Is it sequential or parallelizable (can be parallel is
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "David Alayachew" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 2:33:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Gatherers -- conditionalWindowFixed?
> Hi David!
> Apologies for the late reply, there's been lots of catching up to do after the
> holidays.
> >I'm really excited
> From: "Remi Forax"
> To: "David Alayachew"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 8:19:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Gatherers -- conditionalWindowFixed?
> Hello David,
> testing the gatherer api, I also wanted a "window&
Hello David,
testing the gatherer api, I also wanted a "window" operation as the one you are
describing.
My use cases is a text file with some sections containing items organized like
this
:section1
item1
item2
item3
:section2
item1
item2
...
For me the signature of such method,
- Original Message -
> From: "Pavel Rappo"
> To: "Roger Riggs"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 5:31:06 PM
> Subject: Re: Blessed modifier order does not include sealed/non-sealed
> Hi Roger,
>
> Happy New Year to you too!
>
> Although it's a _somewhat_ separate
- Original Message -
> From: "Pavel Rappo"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 12:56:08 PM
> Subject: Blessed modifier order does not include sealed/non-sealed
> I couldn't find any prior discussions on this matter.
>
> I noticed that bin/blessed-modifier-order.sh
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:01:12 GMT, Hannes Greule wrote:
> Isn't Arrays.equals() used under the hood?
No, for arrays == is used
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17143#issuecomment-1863374656
- Original Message -
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 11:32:48 AM
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8319123: Implementation of JEP-461: Stream Gatherers
> (Preview) [v7]
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:48:13 GMT, Rémi F
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:51:42 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
>
> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Addressing last review feedback
Hello,
the
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/Gatherers.java line 64:
> 62: *needlessly
> 63: * 3. allows for more efficient composition and evaluation
>
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/GathererOp.java line 232:
> 230: */
> 231: @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
> 232: private GathererOp(Gatherer
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/GathererOp.java line 448:
> 446: private final long targetSize;
> 447: private final Hybrid
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/GathererOp.java line 180:
> 178: finisher.accept(state, this);
> 179: sink.end();
> 180:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/GathererOp.java line 95:
> 93: public void accept(X x) {
> 94: final var b = rightMost;
> 95:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/GathererOp.java line 50:
> 48: */
> 49: final class GathererOp extends ReferencePipeline {
> 50:
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 17:22:05 GMT, Rémi Forax wrote:
>> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/Gatherer.java line 490:
>
>> 488: * more elements sent to it, {@code false
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/Gatherer.java line 444:
> 442: */
> 443: static Gatherer of(
> 444: Supplier initializer,
wildcards
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 15:17:57 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> It's still possible to have a situation where PECS signature could be
>> useful, and I don't see any downsides. A user may want to reuse the same
>> static integrator instead of creating several identical lambdas just because
>> the
On Sun, 5 Nov 2023 16:18:52 GMT, Tagir F. Valeev wrote:
>> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/Gatherer.java line 330:
>
>> 328: static Gatherer ofSequential(
>> 329: Integrator integrator,
>>
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 17:10:05 GMT, Tagir F. Valeev wrote:
>> Has this proven to be a problem for things like
>> [Collectors.mapping(…)](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/21/docs/api/java.base/java/util/stream/Collectors.html#mapping(java.util.function.Function,java.util.stream.Collector))
>>
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 13:19:30 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/AbstractPipeline.java line 242:
>
>> 240: }
>> 241:
>> 242: // Terminal evaluation methods
>
> This is needed
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 16:51:34 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> Since stream facilities are package-private, we can just use no access
>> modifier and remove all new `protected` access modifier (on methods, fields,
>> constructors) in this PR.
>
> @liach We could do that, yet I'm not sure that is
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:38:35 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> This Pull-Request implements [JEP-461](https://openjdk.org/jeps/461)
src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/AbstractPipeline.java line 223:
> 221: * consumed
> 222: */
> 223: protected AbstractPipeline(AbstractPipeline
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 16:43:30 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Consider code like:
>>
>> void test(Object o) {
>> switch (o) {
>> case X1 -> {}
>> case X2 -> {}
>> ...(about 100 cases)
>> ```
>>
>> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
>> invocation
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 15:32:34 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Consider code like:
>>
>> void test(Object o) {
>> switch (o) {
>> case X1 -> {}
>> case X2 -> {}
>> ...(about 100 cases)
>> ```
>>
>> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
>> invocation
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 15:29:05 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Thanks for all the comments so far - I think I've either reflected them, or
> wrote a comment to each of them. Please let me know if there's something
> else, or if I've forgotten something.
You idea to use an extra array is clever. Using
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 15:32:34 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Consider code like:
>>
>> void test(Object o) {
>> switch (o) {
>> case X1 -> {}
>> case X2 -> {}
>> ...(about 100 cases)
>> ```
>>
>> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
>> invocation
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 15:32:34 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Consider code like:
>>
>> void test(Object o) {
>> switch (o) {
>> case X1 -> {}
>> case X2 -> {}
>> ...(about 100 cases)
>> ```
>>
>> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
>> invocation
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 08:41:12 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Consider code like:
>
> void test(Object o) {
> switch (o) {
> case X1 -> {}
> case X2 -> {}
> ...(about 100 cases)
> ```
>
> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
> invocation to
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 08:41:12 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Consider code like:
>
> void test(Object o) {
> switch (o) {
> case X1 -> {}
> case X2 -> {}
> ...(about 100 cases)
> ```
>
> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
> invocation to
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 08:41:12 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> Consider code like:
>
> void test(Object o) {
> switch (o) {
> case X1 -> {}
> case X2 -> {}
> ...(about 100 cases)
> ```
>
> javac will compile the switch into a switch whose selector is an indy
> invocation to
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 12:24:31 GMT, Jim Laskey wrote:
>> Uhmm. In the spec I see implicit classes named here:
>>
>>
>> For reference, the following constructs are declared implicitly in source
>> code, but are not marked as mandated because only formal parameters and
>> modules can be so
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Tyler Kindy"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 10:59:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Update on JEP-461: Stream Gatherers (Preview)
> That's also a good point, and I've heard from multiple sources that sometimes
> you want to make sure
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:55:29 GMT, altrisi wrote:
>> Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Fix additional formating issue
>> - Don't use polymorphism and reformat code
>
> With the recent changes this ends up just
Java because usually classes that share
>> implementation details are in the same package (or in the same nestmate
>> nest).
>
> @forax Note that HashMap uses a similar subclassing idiom for the iterators
> of the keySet, values, and entrySet collections in order to share th
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 11:48:51 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to slightly improve some iterators of `AbstractMap`:
>
> * Code reuse
> * A field declared `final`
> * Add missing `@Override` annotations
Hello,
In Java, sharing code may have a runtime cost (or not) depending on the shape
On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 22:22:43 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> 8268829: Provide an optimized way to walk the stack with Class object only
>>
>> `StackWalker::walk` creates one `StackFrame` per frame and the current
>> implementation
>> allocates one `StackFrameInfo` and one `MemberName` objects per
On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 22:22:43 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> 8268829: Provide an optimized way to walk the stack with Class object only
>>
>> `StackWalker::walk` creates one `StackFrame` per frame and the current
>> implementation
>> allocates one `StackFrameInfo` and one `MemberName` objects per
On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 22:22:43 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> 8268829: Provide an optimized way to walk the stack with Class object only
>>
>> `StackWalker::walk` creates one `StackFrame` per frame and the current
>> implementation
>> allocates one `StackFrameInfo` and one `MemberName` objects per
Sorry, you can not do that.
Optional is a value based class [1] (see the javadoc) so the class has to be
final.
And more generally, the API of a classes of OpenJDK will not change based on
some stylistic issue, OOP or not.
regards,
Rémi Forax
[1]
https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 16:19:35 GMT, Hollis Waite wrote:
> a SequencedCollection is backed by a doubly linked list. It's up to the user
> to understand performance implications.
Beware of this kind of thinking, implementations of collections in the JDK
change.
Many hashtable implementations in
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:16:11 GMT, Hollis Waite wrote:
>> Stuart Marks has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 96 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8266571-SequencedCollections
>> - Optimizations for
- Original Message -
> From: "Uwe Schindler"
> To: "core-libs-dev" , net-...@openjdk.org,
> nio-...@openjdk.org, security-...@openjdk.org
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 6:08:17 PM
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8311943: Cleanup usages of toLowerCase() and toUpperCase()
> in java.base [v2]
> On
oops, sorry, my bad, sending an email when you are deprived of sleep does not
lead to a good outcome.
Remi
On July 7, 2023 4:40:53 PM UTC, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 16:23:37 GMT, Remi Forax wrote:
>
>> I'm not a big fan of hiding exceptions, why
I'm not a big fan of hiding exceptions, why not wrapping the IOException in an
UncheckedIOException ?
So closeUnchecked() means close and throw an unchecked exception if an
exception occurs.
regards,
Rémi
- Original Message -
> From: "Brian Burkhalter"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent:
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2023 11:09:22 AM
> Subject: Re: java.util.stream.Stream: API for user-extensible intermediate
> operations
> From: Remi Forax
> Sent: Thursday, 29 J
> From: "Viktor Klang"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 7:10:42 PM
> Subject: java.util.stream.Stream: API for user-extensible intermediate
> operations
> Hi core-libs-dev,
> Over the past 6+ months I've been thinking about, and tinkering with, how we'd
> be able to expose
o
> - ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/89f2d458...e92ba524
I've rewritten all my tests to use the new API, it works !
https://github.com/forax/loom-fiber/tree/java21
One surprising thing is that Subtask.get() give less leeway to the owner thread
than to the other virtual
On Fri, 26 May 2023 06:07:05 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Jim Laskey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Improving error recovery in presence of less important syntactic errors in
>> top-level methods and fields.
>>
>>
- Original Message -
> From: "David Holmes"
> To: "Raffaello Giulietti" , "core-libs-dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 12:23:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Classes used in method body are loaded lazily or eagerly
> depending on method return type
> On 24/05/2023 12:50 am, Raffaello
- Original Message -
> From: "Сергей Цыпанов"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2023 1:20:44 PM
> Subject: Classes used in method body are loaded lazily or eagerly depending
> on method return type
> Hello,
Hello,
>
> originally this question was asked here:
>
- Original Message -
> From: "-"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2023 6:52:44 AM
> Subject: Exposing checked exceptions that a MethodHandle can throw
> Hello,
> I am eliciting a discussion on the feasibility of tracking checked
> exceptions thrown by a MethodHandle. It is
- Original Message -
> From: "Uwe Schindler"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 9:13:35 AM
> Subject: Re: JEP 442: Foreign Function & Memory API => why is it again
> preview API?
> Hi
- Original Message -
> From: "Uwe Schindler"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 5:38:32 PM
> Subject: JEP 442: Foreign Function & Memory API => why is it again preview
> API?
> Hi,
Hi Uwe,
>
> yesterday Apache Lucene got the information that JDK 21 got the project
>
On Mon, 8 May 2023 10:46:34 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandleProxies.java line
>> 342:
>>
>>> 340:
>>> 341: // individual handle fields
>>> 342: clb.withField(ORIGINAL_TARGET_NAME, CD_MethodHandle,
>>>
On Fri, 5 May 2023 17:35:33 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> `Flags.MANDATED` on a class is currently enough to know if it's a unnamed
>> class or not, but it's not enough for classes not produced by javac.
>
> good point
Just to be clear, here, Flags.UNNAMED_CLASS is needed because an an unnamed
On Fri, 5 May 2023 17:08:35 GMT, Vicente Romero wrote:
>> Jim Laskey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Recommended changes #2
>
> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/parser/JavacParser.java
> line 3999:
>
ot;
> To: "Ethan McCue" , "Raffaello Giulietti"
>
> Cc: "Remi Forax" , "Stuart Marks"
> ,
> "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 4:38:16 AM
> Subject: Re: The introduction of Sequenced collections is not a source
> c
nference problem.
Rémi
- Original Message -
> From: "Stuart Marks"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2023 2:44:28 AM
> Subject: Re: The introduction of Sequenced collections is not a source
> compatible
On Tue, 2 May 2023 21:22:16 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> As John Rose has pointed out in this issue, the current j.l.r.Proxy based
>> implementation of MethodHandleProxies.asInterface has a few issues:
>> 1. Exposes too much information via Proxy supertype (and WrapperInstance
>> interface)
>> 2.
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 15:55:40 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> The pattern matching switches are using a bootstrap method
>> `SwitchBootstrap.typeSwitch` to implement the jumps in the switch.
>> Basically, for a switch like:
>>
>> switch (obj) {
>> case String s when s.isEmpty() -> {}
>> case
On Mon, 1 May 2023 14:56:27 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> As John Rose has pointed out in this issue, the current j.l.r.Proxy based
>> implementation of MethodHandleProxies.asInterface has a few issues:
>> 1. Exposes too much information via Proxy supertype (and WrapperInstance
>> interface)
>> 2.
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 15:55:40 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> The pattern matching switches are using a bootstrap method
>> `SwitchBootstrap.typeSwitch` to implement the jumps in the switch.
>> Basically, for a switch like:
>>
>> switch (obj) {
>> case String s when s.isEmpty() -> {}
>> case
I've several repositories that now fails to compile with the latest jdk21,
which introduces sequence collections.
The introduction of a common supertype to existing collections is *not* a
source compatible change because of type inference.
Here is a simplified example:
public static void
On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:25:04 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> This is the first draft of a patch for JEP 440 and JEP 441. Changes included:
>>
>> - the pattern matching for switch and record patterns features are made
>> final, together with updates to tests.
>> - parenthesized patterns are
On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 15:30:24 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Also, surprisingly, if I make C and D classes (instead of interfaces):
>>
>> class Test {
>> sealed interface I permits C, D { }
>> final class C implements I { }
>> final class D implements I { }
>>
>> interface
> From: "Glavo"
> To: "core-libs-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2023 10:02:01 PM
> Subject: Draft: Deprecate toLowerCase()/toUpperCase() and provide locale
> insensitive alternative
> Hi everyone,
> A few months ago, I discussed in this mailing list[1] whether
> toLowerCase()/toUpperCase()
On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 18:33:29 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> As John Rose has pointed out in this issue, the current j.l.r.Proxy based
>> implementation of MethodHandleProxies.asInterface has a few issues:
>> 1. Exposes too much information via Proxy supertype (and WrapperInstance
>> interface)
>> 2.
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
