On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:22:55 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>> I thought about that but not sure of performance impact. Is the worst
>>> problem that more than one warnings will be printed for a single caller?
>>> It's not really harmless.
>>>
>>> As for the frame, if the warning message only contain
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 17:15:29 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> I thought about that but not sure of performance impact. Is the worst
>> problem that more than one warnings will be printed for a single caller?
>> It's not really harmless.
>>
>> As for the frame, if the warning message only contain the
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:52 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I thought about that but not sure of performance impact. Is the worst problem
> that more than one warnings will be printed for a single caller? It's not
> really harmless.
>
> As for the frame, if the warning message only contain the calle
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:11:17 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either
>> enabled at startup or installed at runtime.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java line 331:
>
>> 329:
>> 330: // Remember original System.er
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:41:11 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > You might want to make your "WARNING" consistent with the VM's "Warning" so
> > that OutputAnalyzer's logic to ignore warnings will automatically ignore
> > these too.
>
> The uppercase "WARNING" is intentional here, it was the same with
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 20:42:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either
> enabled at startup or installed at runtime.
Changes to LoggerFinderLoaderTest look reasonable to me.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4400
