Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Leo Korinth
> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of > createTestJvm. > > I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed > -i -e > "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"` > > Then I have manually modifi

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Roger Riggs
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of >> createTestJvm. >> >> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed >> -i -e >> "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBu

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Leo Korinth
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:06:01 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> copyright > > I don't think this is the best change across so many files. > It gives a very ugly name to a common test fu

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Roger Riggs
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:06:01 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> copyright > > I don't think this is the best change across so many files. > It gives a very ugly name to a common test fu

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Chris Plummer
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of >> createTestJvm. >> >> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed >> -i -e >> "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBu

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-30 Thread David Holmes
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:45:12 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> I don't think this is the best change across so many files. >> It gives a very ugly name to a common test function and affects a very large >> number of tests. > >> @RogerRiggs If it is only the name you want changed, maybe you can offer a