On Thu, 5 May 2022 16:49:07 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
> JDK-6725221 Standardize obtaining boolean properties with defaults
I did wonder why it has security-libs as the sub-category and if the intent was
not what we see here.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8559
On Thu, 5 May 2022 16:49:07 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
> JDK-6725221 Standardize obtaining boolean properties with defaults
The xtoolkit change is fine. I've not looked at anything else
You'll clearly need multiple reviewers for this one.
-
Marked as reviewed by prr (Reviewer).
PR: h
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 13:23:23 GMT, Zhengyu Gu wrote:
>> The changes to the usages in src/java.base look okay.
>
> Thanks, @AlanBateman @dfuch
@zhengyu123 - why did you ignore the request to wait for a client reviewer ?
Over half the files touched are in client ? Might I ask what tests you ran ?
A
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:39:31 GMT, Matteo Baccan wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have reviewed the code for removing double semicolons at the end of lines
>
> all the best
> matteo
Marked as reviewed by prr (Reviewer).
Looks like there's only one client source code file touched
Most of the client changes a
On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 19:23:59 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> Here are the code changes for the "Deprecate finalizers in the standard Java
>> API" portion of JEP 421 ("Deprecate Finalization for Removal") for code
>> review.
>>
>> This change makes the indicated deprecations, and updates the API
On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 08:18:47 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> Instead of something like
>>
>> long x;
>> long y;
>> return (x < y) ? -1 : ((x == y) ? 0 : 1);
>>
>> we can use `return Long.compare(x, y);`
>>
>> All replacements are done with IDE.
>
> Сергей Цыпанов has updated the pull request inc
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:30:56 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> This PR follows up one of the recent PRs, where I used a non-canonical
> modifier order. Since the problem was noticed [^1], why not to address it at
> mass?
>
> As far as I remember, the first mass-canonicalization of modifiers took place
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:28:36 GMT, Julia Boes wrote:
>> This change adds some common types to the content-type.properties files,
>> notably .js, .css, and .jar, as well as some others.
>>
>> The duplicated entry for .zip is removed from the Windows properties file.
>
> Julia Boes has updated th
On Fri, 21 May 2021 20:37:30 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> The code change refactors classes that have a `SuppressWarnings("removal")`
>> annotation that covers more than 50KB of code. The big annotation is often
>> quite faraway from the actual deprecated API usage it is suppressing, and
>> with
On Fri, 28 May 2021 02:50:55 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Component.java line 630:
>>
>>> 628: }
>>> 629:
>>> 630: @SuppressWarnings("removal")
>>
>> I'm confused. I thought the reason this wasn't done in the JEP
>> implementation PR is be
On Fri, 21 May 2021 20:37:30 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> The code change refactors classes that have a `SuppressWarnings("removal")`
>> annotation that covers more than 50KB of code. The big annotation is often
>> quite faraway from the actual deprecated API usage it is suppressing, and
>> with
On Mon, 24 May 2021 13:53:34 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review this implementation of [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> The code change is divided into 3 commits. Please review them one by one.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/576161d15423f58281e38
On Wed, 19 May 2021 13:47:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review this implementation of [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> The code change is divided into 3 commits. Please review them one by one.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/576161d15423f58281e38
On Tue, 18 May 2021 21:44:43 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review the test changes for [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> With JEP 411 and the default value of `-Djava.security.manager` becoming
>> `disallow`, tests calling `System.setSecurityManager()` need
>> `-Djav
On Thu, 20 May 2021 07:06:00 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> The JEP isn't PTT for 17 so there's plenty of time isn't there ?
>
> There are 827 files in this patch. Phil is right that adding SW at the class
> level is introducing technical debt but if addressing that requires
> refactoring and re-t
On Thu, 20 May 2021 04:05:23 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> By converting JDK-8267432 to a bug, there is an extra benefit that we can
>> fix it after RDP. So I'll convert it now.
>
> That is unfortunate, but nonetheless I think required to be done.
> We have acknowledege
On Thu, 20 May 2021 02:09:57 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> I can make it a bug.
>>
>> I don't want to do it here is because it involves indefinite amount of
>> manual work and we will see everyone having their preferences. The more time
>> we spend on this PR the more likely there will be merge c
On Wed, 19 May 2021 22:14:20 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> I don't think it is a separate P4 enhancement (?) that someone will (maybe)
>> do next release.
>> I think it should all be taken care of as part of this proposed change.
>
> I just made it P3 (P4 was the default value), and I will target i
On Wed, 19 May 2021 21:53:35 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> That's a sad limitation of the annotation stuff then, but I don't think that
>> it is insurmountable.
>> You can define a static private method to contain this and call it from the
>> static initializer block.
>> Much better than applying
On Wed, 19 May 2021 18:38:39 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Component.java line 217:
>>
>>> 215: * @author Sami Shaio
>>> 216: */
>>> 217: @SuppressWarnings("removal")
>>
>> Why is this placed on the *entire class* ??
>> This class is 10535 lines long
On Wed, 19 May 2021 13:47:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review this implementation of [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> The code change is divided into 3 commits. Please review them one by one.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/576161d15423f58281e38
On Wed, 19 May 2021 13:47:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review this implementation of [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> The code change is divided into 3 commits. Please review them one by one.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/576161d15423f58281e38
On Wed, 19 May 2021 13:47:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Please review this implementation of [JEP
>> 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411).
>>
>> The code change is divided into 3 commits. Please review them one by one.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/576161d15423f58281e38
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 19:35:25 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов
wrote:
>> In some cases wrapping of `InputStream` with `BufferedInputStream` is
>> redundant, e.g. in case the wrapped one is `ByteArrayOutputStream` which
>> does not require any buffer having one within.
>>
>> Other cases are related to readi
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:22:48 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
>> jrtfs is compiled twice, the second is to --release 8 so it can be packaged
>> into jrt-fs.jar for use by IDEs/tools running on older JDK releases. So need
>> to be careful with the changes here as it will likely causing build breakag
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 20:46:15 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов
wrote:
> As discussed in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/510 there is never a
> reason to explicitly instantiate any instance of `Atomic*` class with its
> default value, i.e. `new AtomicInteger(0)` could be replaced with `new
> AtomicInteg
On Sun, 6 Sep 2020 13:57:19 GMT, Dmitriy Dumanskiy
wrote:
> **isEmpty** is faster + has less byte code + easier to read. Benchmarks could
> be found
>
> [here](https://medium.com/javarevisited/micro-optimizations-in-java-string-equals-22be19fd8416).
1) This is un-necessary churn.
2) I can't
collecting them :)
- Alan Bateman (lib): Initial comments (16 Sep [2])
- Chris Hegarty (lib/net): Initial comments (20 Sep [3])
- Michael McMahon (net): Initial comments (20 Sept [4])
- Steffan Larsen (svc): APPROVED (20 Sept [5])
- Phil Race (2d): Initial comments (18 Sept [6]
them :)
- Alan Bateman (lib): Initial comments (16 Sep [2])
- Chris Hegarty (lib/net): Initial comments (20 Sep [3])
- Michael McMahon (net): Initial comments (20 Sept [4])
- Steffan Larsen (svc): APPROVED (20 Sept [5])
- Phil Race (2d): Initial comments (18 Sept [6]); Additional comments
(15 Oct
29 matches
Mail list logo
