Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Alan Bateman
On 29/08/2017 21:26, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, please review this patch to pre-calculate constants in java.net.URI and sun.net.www.ParseUtil, removing work from runtime (reduces bytecodes executed in the interpreter on bootstrap by ~15K). This also removes use of BitSet from ParseUtil, which ap

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Claes Redestad
On 2017-08-30 16:10, Alan Bateman wrote: On 29/08/2017 21:26, Claes Redestad wrote: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8186930/jdk.00/ This looks good to me. Thanks! I just wonder if ParseUtil should keep the lowMask/highMask methods in comments so that further maintainers can sat

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Alan Bateman
On 31/08/2017 00:11, Claes Redestad wrote: : I just wonder if ParseUtil should keep the lowMask/highMask methods in comments so that further maintainers can satisfy themselves that the values are correct. I thought leaving a comment in ParseUtil that they can be still found in URI was suf

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Claes Redestad
On 2017-08-30 17:17, Alan Bateman wrote: I think it could be useful as someone reading the code isn't going to immediately know to jump to URI. Done: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8186930/jdk.01/ /Claes

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Daniel Fuchs
Hi Claes, Maybe it could be interesting to leave the methods in a static inner class which is not referenced (except by whitebox tests) and have this inner class expose a static test() method that would test that the static fields in URI have the expected value? This is just a suggestion, and i

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Chris Hegarty
> On 31 Aug 2017, at 16:26, Claes Redestad wrote: > > > On 2017-08-30 17:17, Alan Bateman wrote: >> I think it could be useful as someone reading the code isn't going to >> immediately know to jump to URI. > > Done: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8186930/jdk.01/ Thanks for doing this C

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Alan Bateman
On 31/08/2017 16:26, Claes Redestad wrote: On 2017-08-30 17:17, Alan Bateman wrote: I think it could be useful as someone reading the code isn't going to immediately know to jump to URI. Done: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8186930/jdk.01/ This looks good to me. -Alan

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Claes Redestad
Hi Daniel, I'm not sure: I have no love for whitebox tests in general, and especially not for code where doing exhaustive black box tests against a public API is possible and perhaps even straightforward (the test coverage seems adequate currently, but can of course always be improved). /Cla

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Claes Redestad
On 2017-08-30 18:18, Chris Hegarty wrote: Thanks for doing this Claes, this latest version looks good to me. Thanks Chris! /Claes

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Claes Redestad
On 2017-08-30 18:26, Alan Bateman wrote: This looks good to me. Thanks, Alan! /Claes

Re: [10] RFR: 8186930: Constant fold URI constants

2017-08-30 Thread Paul Sandoz
One way to proceed in the future is to use those static methods as constant producing functions (via condy), then at jlink time run the functions and possibly strip out the then redundant code. Paul. > On 30 Aug 2017, at 09:16, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > > Hi Claes, > > Maybe it could be interest