On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik <
jaroslav.bacho...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 8.10.2015 18:56, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
>> Hi Jaroslav,
>>
>> we all keep writing finalization code like this... welcome to the club!
>>
>>I think it would be better :
>> - never use currentTimeMil
On 10/09/2015 06:54 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 09/10/2015 16:36, Peter Levart wrote:
:
Sorry, but I must be missing something.
When you compile a class (not an MXBean as Daniel pointed out, but a
data object class) with JDK9, it can't be used on JDK8 because of
class file version.
Whe
Is the code below expected to be running in the thread created by
System.runFinalization()? If so, check for that, i.e. that the thread name
is as you expect.
61 } else {
62 /*
63 * A 'non-finalizer' thread in this context means that
we
64
If it ever happens that an object with a non-trivial finalizer is optimized
away, that would be a serious JDK bug, so I would remove the constructor
code for MyObject (what are you protecting against?). See my sample code
in previous msg.
WeakReference ref = new WeakReference(new Object() {
85 long targetTime = System.nanoTime()+ TIMEOUT;
86 while (System.nanoTime()< targetTime) {
This code violates the rules for usage of nanoTime
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/lang/System.html#nanoTime--
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik <
jaroslav.bacho...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 8.10.2015 18:56, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
>>
>>I think it would be better :
>> - never use currentTimeMillis to measure elapsed time; use nanoTime
>> instead
>>
>
> Ok. I suppose this would be becaus
On 09/10/2015 16:36, Peter Levart wrote:
:
Sorry, but I must be missing something.
When you compile a class (not an MXBean as Daniel pointed out, but a
data object class) with JDK9, it can't be used on JDK8 because of
class file version.
When you compile a class with JDK8, it can't conta
On 10/09/2015 02:30 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
To answer my question: "How is one supposed to compile an MXBean that
would work in JDK8- and at the same time in JDK9+ without java.desktop
in the module graph?"
Annotate the constructor with the both the @j.b.CP and the new @CP. In
JDK 9 the
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8135188/webrev.01
test/serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java
L53: OutputAnalyzer out =
ProcessTools.executeProcess(testAppPb);
L54: out.stderrShouldNotMatch("^" +
FinalizationRunner.FAILED + ".*")
L55:.std
On 09/10/15 14:30, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Would it be possible for javac to recognise a class is an MXBean and
turn-on -parameters for such classes only by default? Too hacky?
Definitely :) Hacky as heck :)
I agree with Jaroslav.
FWIW - The @CP is not used for the MXBean itself, but for th
On 9.10.2015 14:21, Peter Levart wrote:
On 10/09/2015 02:07 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
On 9.10.2015 13:42, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
I don't think it has been mentioned before, but is
@ConstructorProperties still necessary in JDK8+ ? Couldn't the
j.l.r.Constructor#getParameters() be used ins
On 10/09/2015 02:07 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
On 9.10.2015 13:42, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
I don't think it has been mentioned before, but is
@ConstructorProperties still necessary in JDK8+ ? Couldn't the
j.l.r.Constructor#getParameters() be used instead?
This requires the class to be com
On 9.10.2015 13:42, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
I don't think it has been mentioned before, but is
@ConstructorProperties still necessary in JDK8+ ? Couldn't the
j.l.r.Constructor#getParameters() be used instead?
This requires the class to be compiled with '-parameters' switch.
How is one suppo
On 09/10/2015 12:42, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
I don't think it has been mentioned before, but is
@ConstructorProperties still necessary in JDK8+ ? Couldn't the
j.l.r.Constructor#getParameters() be used instead?
How is one supposed to compile an MXBean that would work in JDK8 and
at the same
Hi,
I don't think it has been mentioned before, but is
@ConstructorProperties still necessary in JDK8+ ? Couldn't the
j.l.r.Constructor#getParameters() be used instead?
How is one supposed to compile an MXBean that would work in JDK8 and at
the same time in JDK9+ without java.desktop in the
On 9.10.2015 08:51, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
On 8.10.2015 18:56, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Hi Jaroslav,
we all keep writing finalization code like this... welcome to the club!
I think it would be better :
- never use currentTimeMillis to measure elapsed time; use nanoTime
instead
Ok. I suppo
16 matches
Mail list logo
