On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 23:51:36 GMT, John R Rose wrote:
> I'm surprised to see `@ForceInline` in the offset query functions in
> `Unsafe`. Those are not on any fast path I'm aware of. What use case does
> this annotation address? If none, consider deleting; it will be a future
> maintenance puzzl
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 23:30:21 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
> Some good reason to *not* adopt my proposal?
I am still afraid of such a pattern in the future like:
CharSequence cs = ...
if (cs.getClass().getModule() == Object.class.getModule()) {
// or cs.getClass().getClassLoader() == null
cs.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:36:08 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into implement-jep502
>> - Clean up exception messages and f
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:22:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Implement JEP 502.
>>
>> The PR passes tier1-tier3 tests.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into imple
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:22:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Implement JEP 502.
>>
>> The PR passes tier1-tier3 tests.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into imple
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:22:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Implement JEP 502.
>>
>> The PR passes tier1-tier3 tests.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into imple
The current test program for the logging feature added in JDK-8301627 does not
fully check some important cases.
Issue Details:
The test does not properly check cases where logging might not happen due to
different logging levels. (e.g. ALL, TRACE, WARNING, etc.)
The check for the logged stack t
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 12:45:23 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> > What testing have you run?
>
> I put it into our testing queue, this runs jtreg tier 1 - 4 and some more
> stuff over the weekend on all our platforms.
No issues were seen with the patch in the mentioned tests.
-
PR Co
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 00:34:45 GMT, John R Rose wrote:
> I see that, probably due to prior `java.util` contracts, a stable list or map
> cannot present a `toString` with unset component values. A stable list or
> map uses a “canned” `toString` method that calls `get`, which must force all
> com
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 16:50:19 GMT, Luca Kellermann wrote:
>> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into implement-jep502
>> - Clean up exception messages and fix co
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:22:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Implement JEP 502.
>>
>> The PR passes tier1-tier3 tests.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into imple
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 18:31:38 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Cleanup the single use of JavaLangAccess.exit() it is no longer necessary;
> System.exit() can be called directly.
Marked as reviewed by abdelhak-za...@github.com (no known OpenJDK username).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.o
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:22:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Implement JEP 502.
>>
>> The PR passes tier1-tier3 tests.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 246 commits:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into imple
You can just switch-match on trusted types, then it even looks modern. :)Gruß,Bernd-- https://bernd.eckenfels.net Von: core-libs-dev im Auftrag von Chen Liang Gesendet: Montag, März 17, 2025 3:25 AMAn: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org ; nio-...@openjdk.org Betreff: Re: RFR: 8343110: Add getChars(int, int
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 00:18:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> What is the intended way of using this? Do you run make with
>>> LIBPTHREAD=-pthread or do you apply a patch on libraries.m4 for the
>>> specific way of linking to pthread?
>>
>> This is in preparation of the upcoming BSD port, which use
15 matches
Mail list logo
