> Am 09.06.2017 um 08:44 schrieb Duncan Jones <dun...@wortharead.com>:
>
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 at 02:35, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Simon Spero <sesunc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There is a one other compatibility issue, which can be seen in the
>> attached
>>> code:
>>>
>>> import java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;
>>>
>>> public class Weasel {
>>>
>>> private static final String US_ASCII = "US-ASCII";
>>> private static final String UTF_8 = "UTF-8";
>>> private static final String STANDARD_US_ASCII =
>>> StandardCharsets.US_ASCII.name();
>>> private static final String STANDARD_UTF_8 =
>>> StandardCharsets.UTF_8.name
>>> ();
>>>
>>> public static void main(String[] args) {
>>>
>>> switch (args[0]) {
>>> case US_ASCII:
>>> System.out.println("USA! USA!");
>>> break;
>>> case UTF_8:
>>> System.out.println("Emoji Lovin' Hippies!");
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> System.out.println("Weirdo.");
>>> }
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> This code compiles.
>>> However, if the case labels are changed to STANDARD_US_ASCII and
>>> STANDARD_UTF_8, the compilation will fail, because the case labels are
>> no
>>> longer constant expressions.
>>> In the actual code, this means that code compiled against an older
>> version
>>> of the library would work against the new code (because the old strings
>> had
>>> already been inlined), but could not be re-compiled.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for doing this research and POC :-)
>>
>> But Ugh! :-( We shot ourselves in the foot here.
>
>
> D'oh. Sorry about that guys :-(
No problem!
>
>
>>
>> Benedikt, how do you feel about a fix and a new RC?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I don't know why anyone would be doing this...
>>>
>>> (CLIRR pre-dates string switches)
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:10 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 18:09, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:57 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 17:19, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Simon Spero <sesunc...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [A Note, not a vote :) ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Clirr is generally considered obsolete, as it hadn't been
>> worked
>>>> on
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> about ten years. japicmp is a good replacement, especially for
>>>> report
>>>>>>>> generation, and is used in other commons projects.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IIRC, we've started using japicm here and there. Each component
>> can
>>>>>> decide.
>>>>>>> But yes, Clirr looks pretty dead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Are the "changes" to the values in CharEncoding really
>>>> necessary[1]
>>>>>> (The
>>>>>>>> deprecation surely is). Technically this is a potentially
>> breaking
>>>>>> binary
>>>>>>>> incompatible change, as constant strings and primitives are
>> inlined
>>>> at
>>>>>>>> compile time. [2]
>>>>>>>> In this particular case, the results of load-time evaluation of
>> the
>>>> new
>>>>>>>> initialization expressions are identical to the old constants,
>> so
>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> behaviourally compatible; however, since this is the case, and
>>> since
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> all deprecated anyway, why not leave the old values in-place?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The changes are not "necessary" that for sure and we do get Clirr
>>>>>> warnings:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Value of field ISO_8859_1 is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>> Value of field US_ASCII is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>> Value of field UTF_16 is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>> Value of field UTF_16BE is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>> Value of field UTF_16LE is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>> Value of field UTF_8 is no longer a compile-time constant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's source compatible. What is the issue at runtime that could
>> hurt
>>>>>> users?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the OP wrote, constants are inlined by the compiler.
>>>>>> So unless all code is recompiled, if it referenced the constant it
>> may
>>>>>> have a stale value.
>>>>>> That is not binary compatible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But in this case the actual values are the same are they not? So what
>>> is
>>>>> the difference? Would this only be a problem if we changed the string
>>>>> values?
>>>>
>>>> AFAIK the compiler only inlines compile-time constants.
>>>> So going forward, the values won't be inlined.
>>>> I assume the behaviour will be unaffected since the runtime value
>>>> should be the same as the constant.
>>>>
>>>> The release notes really ought to explain why the Clirr report items
>>>> aren't a problem.
>>>>
>>>>> Which we can't since these are defined in the JRE. And the JRE is
>>>>> unlikely to change those.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3. JDK9 adds some extra parameters to the Deprecated annotation
>>> (most
>>>>>>>> notably forRemoval=true, which is used to indicate that the
>>>> annotated
>>>>>> item
>>>>>>>> is really really deprecated.) It's not needed in this case, but
>>> is
>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>> thinking about when jdk9 is eventually released (latest schedule
>>>>>> change :
>>>>>>>> from 7/27/2017 to 9/21/2017).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not think we plan on making Java 9 a requirement for any
>>> current
>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Simon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/commit/7c19a1ff4c217
>>>>>>>> f03c0be62baf1169d689f566825#diff-820a48456e11e85bf6cf5356c1aed4
>>> baR48
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [2] https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se8/html/jls-
>>>>>>>> 13.html#jls-13.4.9
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017 4:48 AM, "Benedikt Ritter" <brit...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we have fixed quite a few bugs and added some nice new features
>>>> since
>>>>>>>>> Commons Lang 3.5 was released, so I would like to release
>> Commons
>>>> Lang
>>>>>>>> 3.6
>>>>>>>>> based on RC3.
>>>>>>>>> The following issues have been fixed since RC2:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Site build now works from source distribution
>>>>>>>>> - IBM JDK test failures have been fixed
>>>>>>>>> - Automatic-Module-Name MANIFEST entry has been added for Java
>> 9
>>>>>>>>> compatibility
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Commons Lang 3.6 R3 is available for review here:
>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/lang (svn
>>> revision
>>>>>>>> 19928)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The tag is here:
>>>>>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-lang.git;
>>>> a=tag;h=
>>>>>>>>> e454e79463ffbbd9114db43019dd211debbcc105
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Commit ID the tag points at:
>>>>>>>>> 360198dfb6a2d68f1702f616dfacee34ae0541bb
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maven Artifacts:
>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
>>>>>>>> orgapachecommons-1250
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> These are the Maven artifacts and their hashes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>> javadoc.jar
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: c8adadb6c0b56c73f2cc2b4c77a09bfe34ec3a66)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>>>> sources.jar.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 46347c179ca9246d146d653bdc7363bda6f17d44)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6.pom.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 1309d4f3dd41a01ff9dd1f3c1a6eee10dad1ef77)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6.pom
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 0fb4499188c94c63b3cba44f12481e193708c4a8)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6.jar.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: e67e7d44751f1e346c2fda496193cbe251cfe098)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>>>> javadoc.jar.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 6b19fa12d319ced69c0f8a27001569514711f9dc)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>> sources.jar
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: f89c1df082d6f67cb7c956715c56d7e7a0508d0a)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6.jar
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: e58ba08b01d37a023746f0987dcd910036a63021)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>> tests.jar.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: af050e8c29a801a5d6783268c56230b814f56240)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>>>>>>> test-sources.jar.asc
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 71e4c11efb9e3b2eff402ba4648d21822fb8da4a)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>>>>> test-sources.jar
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 04a0fc8293d4ed64a54dcc9ba5f996776a4657ea)
>>>>>>>>> /org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.6/commons-lang3-3.6-
>>> tests.jar
>>>>>>>>> (SHA1: 87993a16c14a251062e3fe860fa53b5ef5304a0f)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have tested this with JDK 7, JDK 8 and JDK 9 EA b172 using
>>> Maven
>>>>>> 3.5.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Details of changes since 3.5 are in the release notes:
>>>>>>>>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/lang/RELEASE-
>>>>>> NOTES.txt
>>>>>>>>> http://home.apache.org/~britter/commons/lang/LANG_3_6_
>>>>>>>>> RC3/changes-report.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Site:
>>>>>>>>> http://home.apache.org/~britter/commons/lang/LANG_3_6_RC3
>>>>>>>>> (note some *relative* links are broken and the 3.6 directories
>>> are
>>>>>>>>> not yet created - these will be OK once the site is deployed)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Clirr Report (compared to 3.5):
>>>>>>>>> http://home.apache.org/~britter/commons/lang/LANG_3_6_
>>>>>>>>> RC3/clirr-report.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RAT Report:
>>>>>>>>> http://home.apache.org/~britter/commons/lang/LANG_3_6_
>>>>>>>>> RC3/rat-report.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> KEYS:
>>>>>>>>> https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please review the release candidate and vote.
>>>>>>>>> This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now,
>>>>>>>>> i.e. sometime after 11:00 CEST (UTC+2) 11-June 2017
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 OK, but...
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>> Benedikt
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
