On 19/12/2016 22:41, Mandy Chung wrote:
tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/PatchSystemModules.java needs to be
updated since ModuleBootstrap now depends on this new method:
diff --git
a/test/tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/src1/java.base/jdk/internal/modules/SystemModules.j
Looks OK to me.
-- Jon
On 12/19/2016 02:41 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/PatchSystemModules.java needs to be
updated since ModuleBootstrap now depends on this new method:
diff --git
a/test/tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/src1/java.base/jdk/inter
tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/PatchSystemModules.java needs to be
updated since ModuleBootstrap now depends on this new method:
diff --git
a/test/tools/launcher/modules/patch/systemmodules/src1/java.base/jdk/internal/modules/SystemModules.java
b/test/tools/launcher/modules/patch/s
Ouch, the result of applying and then discarding a suggested
improvement.
Too late for this fix, but I'm sure there'll be future changes to this
file that can amend this mistake.
Thanks for spotting it!
/Claes
On 2016-12-19 21:47, Andrej Golovnin wrote:
Hi Claes,
src/java.base/share/classes/
Hi Claes,
src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/module/ModuleBootstrap.java
313 if (SystemModules.hasSplitPackages() || needPostResolutionChecks) {
314 Map packageToModule = new HashMap<>();
315 for (ResolvedModule resolvedModule : cf.modules()) {
31
On 2016-12-19 20:12, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 19/12/2016 18:14, Claes Redestad wrote:
Good, thanks.
I polished the comment you took issue with further, updated in place:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8171400/webrev.01/
Good to go?
Looks good.
Thanks, pushed!
/Claes
On 19/12/2016 18:14, Claes Redestad wrote:
Good, thanks.
I polished the comment you took issue with further, updated in place:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8171400/webrev.01/
Good to go?
Looks good.
On 2016-12-19 17:35, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 19/12/2016 13:12, Claes Redestad wrote:
I think that'd break things, since we need a logical || here (what you
suggest is an &&):
If we need to do post resolution checks (due to patching the boot
layer or such) we must
check (asthe information in
On 19/12/2016 13:12, Claes Redestad wrote:
I think that'd break things, since we need a logical || here (what you
suggest is an &&):
If we need to do post resolution checks (due to patching the boot
layer or such) we must
check (asthe information in SystemModules is now stale), but if we
On 12/19/2016 01:49 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
This looks good, just two comments:
1. SystemModules.hasSplitPackages should be clearer if just said that
it returns true if the run time images does not contain any split
packages.
Ok,so something like this?
* @return {@code false} if we c
On 19/12/2016 12:30, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
this patch adds a check to see if there are any split packages in the
system
modules at link time, and uses this information to enable us to safely
skip
a runtime check during bootstrap for the common case that there are none
of the sort.
Webre
Hi,
this patch adds a check to see if there are any split packages in the system
modules at link time, and uses this information to enable us to safely skip
a runtime check during bootstrap for the common case that there are none
of the sort.
Webrev[1]: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/81714
12 matches
Mail list logo
