Integrated: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:07:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those > changes where it indeed discovered real typos. > > (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) > > The majority of fixes are in c

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v4]

2022-04-19 Thread Naoto Sato
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:50:12 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those >> changes where it indeed discovered real typos. >> >> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) >> >> The majority of fixes ar

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v4]

2022-04-19 Thread Sean Mullan
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:50:12 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those >> changes where it indeed discovered real typos. >> >> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) >> >> The majority of fixes ar

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v4]

2022-04-19 Thread Lance Andersen
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:50:12 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those >> changes where it indeed discovered real typos. >> >> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) >> >> The majority of fixes ar

Re: RFR: 8283544: HttpClient GET method adds Content-Length: 0 header [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:19:08 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: >> Hello Conor, >> >> I had a look at this latest update to the `Http1Request`. The github diff >> isn't easy to understand/explain in this case, so I'll paste here the latest >> code contained in this PR, from that method. It looks like: >

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v3]

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:24:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those >> changes where it indeed discovered real typos. >> >> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) >> >> The majority of fixes ar

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v4]

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those > changes where it indeed discovered real typos. > > (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) > > The majority of fixes are in comments. A handful is in strings, one in a > local variable n

Re: RFR: 8283544: HttpClient GET method adds Content-Length: 0 header [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:44:35 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/ContentLengthHeaderTest.java line 202: >> >>> 200: } else { >>> 201: String responseBody = exchange.getRequestMethod() + " >>> request contained an unexpected " + >>> 202:

Re: RFR: 8283544: HttpClient GET method adds Content-Length: 0 header [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 13:53:35 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: >> **Issue** >> When using the `HttpClient.send()` to send a GET request created using the >> `HttpRequest.newBuilder()`, a `Content-length: 0` header is set. This >> behaviour causes issues with many services as a body related header is >>

Re: RFR: 8283544: HttpClient GET method adds Content-Length: 0 header [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:43:12 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Conor Cleary has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> 8283544: Updated URI creation > > test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/ContentLengthHeaderTest.java line 202: > >> 200:

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v3]

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those > changes where it indeed discovered real typos. > > (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) > > The majority of fixes are in comments. A handful is in strings, one in a > local variable n

Re: RFR: 8284893: Fix typos in java.base [v2]

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those > changes where it indeed discovered real typos. > > (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically) > > The majority of fixes are in comments. A handful is in strings, one in a > local variable n

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 15:54:02 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote: >> test/jdk/jdk/net/ExtendedSocketOption/DontFragmentTest.java line 44: >> >>> 42: StandardProtocolFamily fam = args[0].equals("ipv4") ? INET : >>> INET6; >>> 43: System.out.println("Family = " + fam); >>> 44: test

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v6]

2022-04-19 Thread Michael McMahon
> Hi, > > Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific > extended socket option > called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 > and IPv6 > UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels). For IPv4 in particular, it sets the DF > (Dont Fragment) bit >

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Michael McMahon
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:50:57 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> fix whitespace > > src/jdk.net/windows/native/libextnet/WindowsSocketOptions.c line 112: > >> 110: retu

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:47:01 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific >> extended socket option >> called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 >> and IPv6 >> UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v5]

2022-04-19 Thread Michael McMahon
> Hi, > > Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific > extended socket option > called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 > and IPv6 > UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels). For IPv4 in particular, it sets the DF > (Dont Fragment) bit >

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v4]

2022-04-19 Thread Michael McMahon
> Hi, > > Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific > extended socket option > called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 > and IPv6 > UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels). For IPv4 in particular, it sets the DF > (Dont Fragment) bit >

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v3]

2022-04-19 Thread Michael McMahon
> Hi, > > Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific > extended socket option > called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 > and IPv6 > UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels). For IPv4 in particular, it sets the DF > (Dont Fragment) bit >

Re: RFR: 8284890: Support for Do not fragment IP socket options [v2]

2022-04-19 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:49:29 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific >> extended socket option >> called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 >> and IPv6 >> UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels