On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 20:42:26 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The intention of this tweak was to be minor and satisfy Alan's request. It >> looks like this becomes not minor anymore as we are discussing a bigger >> scope. :) >> What I would like to avoid is going to different directions force and back. >> This intro section is itself a compromise. The intention was to provide >> summary of differences. Now we want to make those differences understandable >> right away which is not always possible without going into details. >> The JVMTI spec is full of spots which are not perfect and under-specified >> sometimes. But we do not want it to be over-specified either. There has to >> be some balance here. >> Now I'm lost in what direction to go. > >> No I understand it, though I may not be expressing it well. But I find it >> very hard to interpret the suggested words in a way that actually explains >> it. This is the "connect the dots" that Chris refers to. The wording may be >> factually correct, but actually understanding what it means requires >> additional insight. > > Thanks. I see now. I think it is worth holding off on this PR and rethinking the overall approach. I don't see a point in pushing something that pretty clearly will need to be reworked. As this PR now stands, I don't think it provides enough value add to warrant pushing it in its current state. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32211#discussion_r3738726504
