On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 21:12:57 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
>> There are a few places in code, where manual `for` loop is used with
>> Iterator to iterate over Collection.
>> Instead of manual `for` cycles, it's preferred to use enhanced-for cycle
>> instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier t
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:58:01 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> There are few places in code where manual `while` loop is used with Iterator
> to iterate over Collection.
> Instead of manual `while` cycles it's preferred to use _enhanced-for_ cycle
> instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier to
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:58:01 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> There are few places in code where manual `while` loop is used with Iterator
> to iterate over Collection.
> Instead of manual `while` cycles it's preferred to use _enhanced-for_ cycle
> instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier to
On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 16:23:34 GMT, Yumin Qi wrote:
>> Please review,
>> Refactor fundamental CDS FileMapHeader code for reliable reading of basic
>> info from shared archive.
>> With the change, it makes it possible to read an archive generated by
>> different version of hotspot. Also it is
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:58:01 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> There are few places in code where manual `while` loop is used with Iterator
> to iterate over Collection.
> Instead of manual `while` cycles it's preferred to use _enhanced-for_ cycle
> instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier to
> There are a few places in code, where manual `for` loop is used with Iterator
> to iterate over Collection.
> Instead of manual `for` cycles, it's preferred to use enhanced-for cycle
> instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier to read and it's less
> error-prone.
> It doesn't have any perf
There are few places in code where manual `while` loop is used with Iterator to
iterate over Collection.
Instead of manual `while` cycles it's preferred to use _enhanced-for_ cycle
instead: it's less verbose, makes code easier to read and it's less error-prone.
It doesn't have any performance imp
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 05:40:40 GMT, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> This logic no longer seems to be necessary since the adjustCompilationLevel
> callback has been removed.
Marked as reviewed by sspitsyn (Reviewer).
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5625
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 17:07:23 GMT, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> Why are we running the jck jvmti tests on this since they weren't failing
> originally? The problem test list from the commit
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk12/rev/f5fd8eefae0f is all nsk and
> com.sun.jdi tests.
The reason to disab
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 05:40:40 GMT, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> This logic no longer seems to be necessary since the adjustCompilationLevel
> callback has been removed.
Marked as reviewed by dlong (Reviewer).
Make sure to test with -Xcomp.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/562
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 05:40:40 GMT, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> This logic no longer seems to be necessary since the adjustCompilationLevel
> callback has been removed.
Yes, running locally with GraalVM is fine.
-
Marked as reviewed by kvn (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jd
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 05:40:40 GMT, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> This logic no longer seems to be necessary since the adjustCompilationLevel
> callback has been removed.
I don't see any easy way to run the suggested command at the moment through
mach5. We've already pushed this change into our JDK17
12 matches
Mail list logo
