On 22/10/2015 9:05 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Dan,
Sorry I can't wade through this in depth now. A key point is that the
use of the typedef removes the problem of whether you use say 'volatile
Type' or 'Type volatile' when Type is a pointer type.
Except it doesn't seem to in these macros as you d
Dan,
Sorry I can't wade through this in depth now. A key point is that the
use of the typedef removes the problem of whether you use say 'volatile
Type' or 'Type volatile' when Type is a pointer type.
Will try to go into this further when I am back in the office this
afternoon.
David
On 2
On 10/21/15, 7:39 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
On 10/21/15 9:10 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
Adding serviceability-dev@... back in... you gotta stop using
reply-to-alias when there's more than one alias...
The changes to vmStructs are to get it to understand the new
type definition. There's a
On 10/21/15, 1:57 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 21/10/2015 3:17 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 10/20/15, 10:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 21/10/2015 1:53 PM, Carsten Varming wrote:
Dear David,
In this case dummytype is the result of a typedef. "typedef int*
dummytype; volatile dummytype * dum
On 10/21/15 9:10 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
Adding serviceability-dev@... back in... you gotta stop using
reply-to-alias when there's more than one alias...
The changes to vmStructs are to get it to understand the new
type definition. There's a "generate" macro and a "check"
macro that are
Adding serviceability-dev@... back in... you gotta stop using
reply-to-alias when there's more than one alias...
The changes to vmStructs are to get it to understand the new
type definition. There's a "generate" macro and a "check"
macro that are used to generate the corresponding Java side
type
Hi,
Please review this change to JDI/JDWP to address two performance
bottlenecks for high delay networks.
Bug:
8074696: Remote debugging session hangs for several minutes
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074696
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8074696/webrev.00/
This cha
On 21/10/2015 3:17 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 10/20/15, 10:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 21/10/2015 1:53 PM, Carsten Varming wrote:
Dear David,
In this case dummytype is the result of a typedef. "typedef int*
dummytype; volatile dummytype * dummy" is the same as "typedef int*
dummytype;
