Re: RFR: 8138732: Rename @HotSpotIntrinsicCandidate to @IntrinsicCandidate and move it to the jdk.internal.vm.annotation package [v3]

2020-09-21 Thread Philippe Marschall
> Hello, newbie here > > I picked JDK-8138732 to work on because it has a "starter" label and I > believe I understand what to do. > > - I tried to update the copyright year to 2020 in every file. > - I decided to change `@since` from 9 to 16 since it is a new annotation name > in a new package

Re: RFR: 8252195: AWT Accessibility API nested classes rely on default constructors

2020-09-21 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 20:17:36 GMT, Phil Race wrote: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252195 > is another one of the issues adding missing explicit no-args constructors in > the desktop module. > > As well as being nested, these are all concrete, but protected, classes and > so the co

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v3]

2020-09-21 Thread Yumin Qi
> With more CDS related code added to VM, it is time to move CDS code to a > separate class. CDS is the new class which is > specific to CDS. > Tests: tier1-4 Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 8253208: Move CDS related code

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v2]

2020-09-21 Thread Ioi Lam
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:17:55 GMT, Yumin Qi wrote: >> With more CDS related code added to VM, it is time to move CDS code to a >> separate class. CDS is the new class which is >> specific to CDS. >> Tests: tier1-4 > > Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > comm

RFR: 8252195: AWT Accessibility API nested classes rely on default constructors

2020-09-21 Thread Phil Race
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252195 is another one of the issues adding missing explicit no-args constructors in the desktop module. As well as being nested, these are all concrete, but protected, classes and so the constructors are protected. CSR here https://bugs.openjdk.java.net

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v2]

2020-09-21 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:17:55 GMT, Yumin Qi wrote: >> With more CDS related code added to VM, it is time to move CDS code to a >> separate class. CDS is the new class which is >> specific to CDS. >> Tests: tier1-4 > > Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > comm

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v2]

2020-09-21 Thread Mandy Chung
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:17:55 GMT, Yumin Qi wrote: >> With more CDS related code added to VM, it is time to move CDS code to a >> separate class. CDS is the new class which is >> specific to CDS. >> Tests: tier1-4 > > Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > comm

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v2]

2020-09-21 Thread Yumin Qi
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 06:10:53 GMT, Ioi Lam wrote: >> Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class > > src/java.base/share/native/libjava/CDS.c line 49: > >> 47: JNIEXPORT jbo

Re: RFR: 8253208: Move CDS related code to a separate class [v2]

2020-09-21 Thread Yumin Qi
> With more CDS related code added to VM, it is time to move CDS code to a > separate class. CDS is the new class which is > specific to CDS. > Tests: tier1-4 Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 8253208: Move CDS related code

Integrated: 8253321: java.util.Locale.LanguageRange#equals is inconsistent after calling hashCode

2020-09-21 Thread Naoto Sato
On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:26:39 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote: > Hi, > > Please review the fix to JDK-8253321. As in the issue, uninitialized (cached) > hash code was incorrectly referenced in > equals() method. Removing it will correct the problem. Also, unrelated to the > issue, I fixed a parameter des