Hi Roger,
Thank you for the review. Please find my comments below:
On 1/15/20 10:30 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Naoto,
Is it correct to say that there is no impact on startup until there is
an explicit reference to HijrahChronology?
It would seem that the registering HijrahChronology would trigger all
the work and that happens when Chronology is initialized. (see below)
What I meant in the reply to Joe's email was that the data validity
check done in loadCalendarData(), e.g., year value check, etc. which are
not done at class init. But you are correct that the properties files
are read twice (below). I thought it was fine as this is not a common
case (not happened before, to be precise).
HijrahChronology.java:
291-295: Since registerCustomChrono is the only place where CONF_PATH is
used,
do all the work, including the property lookup in that method.
836: If other chronologies are built-in this code will need to be changed.
Can it do the getResourceAsStream first in all cases and fall back
to /conf/chronology?
Yes, it would have to be changed if we support built-in type other than
umalqura. But I would think other code would have to anyways. I think we
can take advantage of the fact that umalqura is the only built-in, and
others come from /conf/chronology so that extra fallback is avoided.
855: Since all the loading is triggered from a static initializer, is
there really any point in throwing an exception.
More useful would be a logging message (assuming logging is allowed
early in startup when Chronology is initialized)
Good point. I will replace UncheckedIOException with logging.
1054: readConfigProperties: The case for the other HijrahChronologies
delays loading the data until it is needed.
This is doing the work to read the file and create the properties
instance but then discards it to be read a second time later.
Perhaps we need to specify that the config file name includes both the
id and type so it can be registered without reading the file.
Should the file name like "Hijrah-config-<id>_<type>.properties" work?
Naoto
Regards, Roger
On 1/14/20 9:37 PM, Joe Wang wrote:
On 1/14/20 6:04 PM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Joe,
Thank you for the review. Please find my comments below:
On 1/14/20 3:35 PM, Joe Wang wrote:
Hi Naoto,
Since it's dealing with non-standard properties files, is there a
need to verify the files? The constructor (HijrahChronology) does
check whether the id or type is empty. If there is no existing
process to validate, it's probably not worth it to spend time as
it's rare and it's config time.
IIUC, the idea is to create the instance at class loading time (thus
the faster the better) and cache it, then check the validity later at
actual method invocation (cf. checkCalendarInit() method).
Make sense.
The test summary states "Test image creation", it may be better to
say sth. like verifies custom configuration?
Good catch! I was simply copying some portion from other test case.
Corrected:
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8187987/webrev.01/
Looks good to me.
Best regards,
Joe
Naoto
Best,
Joe
On 1/14/20 8:35 AM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
Please review the fix to the following issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8187987
The proposed CSR and changeset are located at:
CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8236810
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8187987/webrev.00/
The spec of java.time.chrono.HijrahChronology suggests that it
could load custom variants of Hijirah calendar type using
properties files. However it does not work as designed. This change
intends to make it work.
Naoto
