RFR 8156825: java/net/httpclient/BasicWebSocketAPITest.java failed with "java.lang.AssertionError"

[Michael McMahon]

Could I get the following change reviewed please? There are three small 
changes


1) enhancements to RawChannel API used by websocket implementation

2) fix the test case problem where channel might not be in non-blocking mode
(also remove erroneous asssertion check)

3) Remove (unused) and unintentionally public HttpHeaders1 type

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8156825/webrev.1/

Thanks,
Michael

Re: RFR 8156825: java/net/httpclient/BasicWebSocketAPITest.java failed with "java.lang.AssertionError"

[Pavel Rappo]

This looks good, Michael. Thanks.

> On 16 May 2016, at 12:07, Michael McMahon  
> wrote:
> 
> Could I get the following change reviewed please? There are three small 
> changes
> 
> 1) enhancements to RawChannel API used by websocket implementation
> 
> 2) fix the test case problem where channel might not be in non-blocking mode
>(also remove erroneous asssertion check)
> 
> 3) Remove (unused) and unintentionally public HttpHeaders1 type
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8156825/webrev.1/
> 
> Thanks,
> Michael

Re: RFR 8156825: java/net/httpclient/BasicWebSocketAPITest.java failed with "java.lang.AssertionError"

[Roger Riggs]

Hi Michael,

+1

HttpClientImpl.java: Unless a large number of classes are needed, 
individual imports are preferred.


(Maybe the IDE did that for you, in which the IDE should be reconfigured.)

Roger


On 5/16/2016 7:07 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Could I get the following change reviewed please? There are three 
small changes


1) enhancements to RawChannel API used by websocket implementation

2) fix the test case problem where channel might not be in 
non-blocking mode

(also remove erroneous asssertion check)

3) Remove (unused) and unintentionally public HttpHeaders1 type

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8156825/webrev.1/

Thanks,
Michael

Re: RFR 8156825: java/net/httpclient/BasicWebSocketAPITest.java failed with "java.lang.AssertionError"

[Michael McMahon]

Thanks Roger. What would the consensus be on what 'a large number' is?

- Michael

On 16/05/16 15:11, Roger Riggs wrote:

Hi Michael,

+1

HttpClientImpl.java: Unless a large number of classes are needed, 
individual imports are preferred.


(Maybe the IDE did that for you, in which the IDE should be 
reconfigured.)


Roger


On 5/16/2016 7:07 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Could I get the following change reviewed please? There are three 
small changes


1) enhancements to RawChannel API used by websocket implementation

2) fix the test case problem where channel might not be in 
non-blocking mode

(also remove erroneous asssertion check)

3) Remove (unused) and unintentionally public HttpHeaders1 type

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8156825/webrev.1/

Thanks,
Michael

Re: RFR 8156825: java/net/httpclient/BasicWebSocketAPITest.java failed with "java.lang.AssertionError"

[Roger Riggs]

Hi,

Large:  not a fixed number;  but enough that if you glance at them and 
do not know how many.


Or: So many that anyone would say they tried to read it and lost track 
of how many.  TL;DR


I would say 8-10. In immutable collections;  10 was the number for the 
threshold in the new List constructors.


YMMYV

Roger




On 5/16/2016 10:09 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:

Thanks Roger. What would the consensus be on what 'a large number' is?

- Michael

On 16/05/16 15:11, Roger Riggs wrote:

Hi Michael,

+1

HttpClientImpl.java: Unless a large number of classes are needed, 
individual imports are preferred.


(Maybe the IDE did that for you, in which the IDE should be 
reconfigured.)


Roger


On 5/16/2016 7:07 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Could I get the following change reviewed please? There are three 
small changes


1) enhancements to RawChannel API used by websocket implementation

2) fix the test case problem where channel might not be in 
non-blocking mode

(also remove erroneous asssertion check)

3) Remove (unused) and unintentionally public HttpHeaders1 type

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8156825/webrev.1/

Thanks,
Michael

Re: Reminder about reported problem in NetworkInterface.c

[dalibor topic]

On 12.05.2016 13:18, Ivan St. Ivanov wrote:

Hello Alan,

If that is the showstopper for moving this change forward,


Quoting from the very first step of the OpenJDK contribution guide at 
http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/


"If you haven't yet signed the Oracle Contributor Agreement (OCA) then 
please do so, scan it and e-mail the result to oracle-ca_us(at)oracle.com."



Doychin is
part of the Bulgarian JUG. Which has signed the OCA.


That's not correct. The Bulgarian JUG does not have an OCA on file, as 
you can see at 
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html#b .


You may be confusing the OCA with something else. At this time, there 
are no JUGs with an OCA.


cheers,
dalibor topic
--
 Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
Phone: +494089091214  | Mobile: +491737185961


ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher

 Oracle is committed to developing
practices and products that help protect the environment