On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 09:58:49 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> There is a difference between "working" and not causing a build failure. I >> suspect none of that code is actually needed these days, but I'm not sure. >> As deleting the entire section goes beyond deleting 32-bit code, I would >> expect it to be partially restored in this PR and then cleaned up in a later >> PR. > > "using namespace std;" in a header is generally a bad idea. It brings all > kinds of stuff into scope, potentially leading to name conflicts down the > road. And seems like a strange thing to do only for windows. > > Removal of the strdup macro is covered by the NONSTDC macros added at build > time. It's not a 32bit cleanup either, and you suggested it. > > Removal of [u]intptr_t definitions will cause a build failure if it results in > them being undefined. And getting an incorrect definition from elsewhere seems > implausible. I claim this all just isn't needed anymore and can be removed in > this PR, just as you suggested for the strdup macro. The 64bit definitions > could be added back in this PR (to be removed later by JDK-8343530), but that > just seems like useless churn. > > So I'm happy with the current removal of the entire chunk. It was already quite tangential to the 32-bit windows removal effort. I've restored the original code (with the exception of the 32-bit Windows part) in this PR, so we don't have to argue about that. Let's remove this as a separate effort, presumably as part of JDK-8343530. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21744#discussion_r1828003651
